The Daily Blog Open Mic – Tuesday 5th April 2016

10
0

openmike

 

Announce protest actions, general chit chat or give your opinion on issues we haven’t covered for the day.

Moderation rules are more lenient for this section, but try and play nicely.

 

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

10 COMMENTS

  1. http://geopolitics.co/2016/04/04/panama-papers-mossack-fonseca-tied-to-nazis-cia-mexican-drug-lords/#sthash.h1PKIMDY.dpuf

    THIS IS BIG, AND KEY,JOYCE/COLLINS AND OTHER NATZ MAY BE IMPLICATED NOW, EVEN COLLINS?

    OPPOSITION NEED TO EXPOSE KEY AS HE FAILED TO DISCLOSED TAX WHEN HE WAS FOUND OUT BY LABOUR TO HAVE HIDDEN TRANZRAIL SHARES IN HIS OWN TRUST REMEMBER, BY MICHAEL CULLEN SO HE IS ALREADY STUFFED.

    ON RNZ THIS MORNING KEY SAID NZ HAS A CLEAN SYSTEM WHERE TRUSTS NEED TO DECLARE THEIR SHARES/??????/!!!!!!!!! NOT FOR CERTAIN PM,S PERHAPS?

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0807/S00108.htm

    John Key misleads public over shares sale
    Friday, 4 July 2008, 10:05 am
    Press Release: New Zealand Government

    Hon Dr Michael Cullen
    Minister of Finance
    3 July 2008 Media Statement
    John Key misleads public over shares sale
    John Key must explain why he claimed yesterday to have not commented on Tranz Rail as a Member of Parliament while he was a shareholder in the company when it has been revealed he did just that, Finance Minister Michael Cullen said today.
    Yesterday John Key denied that comments he made on 18 June 2003 about Tranz Rail represented a conflict of interest because he had sold his shares ‘earlier in the year’.
    He said yesterday that he had sold the shares before he began commenting on the issue to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest.
    After the government called on Mr Key to give the exact date of the sale of shares to clear up any confusion, his office has confirmed he did not sell the shares until sometime between 9-12 June 2003.
    However, Mr Key did indeed comment publicly on Tranz Rail without disclosing his shareholding interest. On 9 April 2003, he stood up in Parliament during question time and asked Dr Cullen:
    What instructions has the Minister issued to Treasury regarding the many secret meetings they have held in recent months with Tranz Rail’s management, and can he confirm the reasons that all proposals to spend the $30 million allocated to Transfund in the alternatives to roading scheme have indeed been stonewalled by him to ensure Cabinet had the resources to buy back the tracks, once Treasury reports back to him in a month?
    Dr Cullen has said it is time for Mr Key to explain why he grandstanded yesterday about selling shares before making public comment – going as far as to demand an apology from the Prime Minister- when he was guilty of doing exactly what he was accused of.
    “The moral high ground is dangerous place for Mr Key to lay claim to,” Dr Cullen said.

    GO LABOUR NZ FIRST, GREENS. GET THE NATZ WHILE NAUSSIE IS GETTING INVOVED IT SEEMS.

    http://geopolitics.co/2016/04/04/panama-papers-mossack-fonseca-tied-to-nazis-cia-mexican-drug-lords/#sthash.h1PKIMDY.dpuf

    “The Panama Papers, which relied heavily on the leaked information from Mossack Fonseca law firm, may not just be about State actors and corporate players’ secret offshore shell companies, physical assets and bank accounts, but more about getting back at people who have turned their backs on the New World Order totalitarian regime which took decades of planning, mass murder, regime changes, false flags, and sustained environmental destruction, to construct.

    The Panama Papers look more like a Rothchild dynasty’s exercising the Samson Option. But, it’s still good to know that they are now after each other’s throat.

    It turns out that the Mossack Fonseca law firm is a handy work of the Khazarian Mafia to draw in State leaders and companies purposely to create a bargaining chip on all of them for later use. Blackmailing is a tried and tested method of controlling leaderships everywhere.”

  2. http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-how-to-hack-an-election/

    “Rendón, says Sepúlveda, saw that hackers could be completely integrated into a modern political operation, running attack ads, researching the opposition, and finding ways to suppress a foe’s turnout. As for Sepúlveda, his insight was to understand that voters trusted what they thought were spontaneous expressions of real people on social media more than they did experts on television and in newspapers. He knew that accounts could be faked and social media trends fabricated, all relatively cheaply. He wrote a software program, now called Social Media Predator, to manage and direct a virtual army of fake Twitter accounts. The software let him quickly change names, profile pictures, and biographies to fit any need. Eventually, he discovered, he could manipulate the public debate as easily as moving pieces on a chessboard—or, as he puts it, “When I realized that people believe what the Internet says more than reality,I discovered that I had the power to make people believe almost anything.””

  3. All we need to know how can we use this info to rid ourselves of this toxic government.
    Keys name isnt mentioned in any of the files we have been shown.Why?

  4. On the money,!!!! just checked and the superannuants got $3 a week to keep up with inflation !!!!!!,i believe they underestimate inflation.
    This government is so generous ! with themselves only.

  5. A few weeks back the state security bureaucracy issued their list of the six most worrisome security threats facing New Zealand currently. To me it looked like a message direct from Washington, D.C.

    So at the time I ventured to write down my six most worrisome security threats facing New Zealand from a New Zealand point of view:

    * rapacious economic extortion from overseas companies
    * secrecy of elite information and decision making in NZ
    * hostile multi-national and state-sponsored operations in and against NZ
    * native xenophobia filling gaps left by market failure and hands-off government
    * transnational organised and sanctioned tax evasion
    * instability in the SW Pacific from neo-colonialism

    I’m pretty sure in the last few weeks we’ve seen examples of most of these; one or two need historical examples, but from not that far back.

    I wonder what other people think?

  6. Is anyone going to step up to the plate and call a snap election on this – ever so corrupt government? The govener General?, the Labour Party?, greens? – and where’s Winston on this one – he’s considered the vocal one? The silence is deafening.

    • Hi Kim

      To be fair, the three opposition parties in Parliament today were really hammering FJK. I was quite surprised how far and how long they managed to keep up the attack. But they were giving it to him. FJK was getting angry. His face was quite flushed.

      Most of his responses were flippant and venomous, but the grubbiness of NZ’s involvement was obvious, as he kept blaming the previous Labour government for setting up the trust fund arrangement in 2002, as to be expected! Labour, Labour, Labour! Hardly surprising, because when he’s caught out, in usual form he passes the blame!

      I hope the opposition keeps hammering FJK, preferably hammering him to the wall, so he has no where to turn, like a cornered rat! Then we will see him squirm!

      • Labour can do no right with Key ,except make it possible for him to hide trusts,which i imagine has been made full use of.

  7. @Mary – maybe it’s the media silence that is deafening…
    I noticed that Iceland outed there PM for involvement – good idea i say.

  8. Bomber, there absolutely needs to be an article about “The Prominent New Zealander” trial to show support for the victims. MSM are spinning it and it’s suspicious because they are actually reporting two sides to the story, something they almost never do. There is no suppression on the content of the trial and it hasn’t stopped MSM doing so, without names and identifying information.

    These brave young ladies are telling the truth and I’ll tell you why I think that. There are only two choices, either the girls are lying to stitch him up, or they are telling the truth. The behaviour of the defendant, described by the victims, is exactly what child molesters do when grooming their victims. They test the boundaries and see what they can get away with, how much the victim will object and whether they will tell anyone. These predators deliberately cause fear and confusion to the child so they don’t say anything, by alternating abuse with kindness, (the latter especially in front of other people for appearances). It works because children/young people don’t understand some adults are capable of this. Adults are the people they entrust with their survival. If nothing happens, (the victim doesn’t tell), they keep pushing the boundaries further, and yes I’m speaking from experience.

    I was disgusted to read that the defence cited a photograph of one of victims, having a piggy back, probably posed by the accused, as evidence of his innocence. I hope the jury can see the obvious power differential there.

    To cut to the chase, the allegations are despicable, but if the victims were lying and coached or “out to get him in trouble” as being proposed by the defence, don’t you think the allegations would more explicit if that was the goal?

Comments are closed.