Posts by DexterX
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
In any situation if you need to come clean do it early.
Shearer as Leader of the Opposition is one of the Committee who "oversee" the operation of the GCSB - so in this role he can be rightfully concerned with the operation of the GCSB.
To be in a strong position Shearer would need to raise the issue with the Prime Minister as the Minister in charge of GCSB and also as the person whose behaviour is being called into question.
Should Shearer have come by this information as part of what he considers his oversight role then it is not a serious issue on the level of treason or bad spy behaviour - Shearer could as part of the Committee ask someone from GCSB, the Minister in charge all mmanner of people a version of the question - "WTF is going on?", and expect an answer.
The GCSB is an origination that in a wider sense is at the disposal of the nation's interest and not at the personal bidding of the Prime Minister. The Leader of the Opposition’s role on the committee could be seen to raise the issues he has now raised – these relate to the credibility of the Prime Minister and the operation of the GCSB within the law – part of the checks and balances in a democracy.
Monitoring the news media response to this on both major talk back stations today and having regard to what Whale Oil is banging on about - Key is being painted as the party who has been wronged and Shearer and the source of the info are being painted as villains lacking in character.
That this is turning into an attack on Shearer’s character is a trifle absurd.
Key's response to the wider GCSB and KDC issues has IMHO been, “Prove It?” That proof now seems very near.
There needs to be a commission of inquiry.
-
Legal Beagle: Kim Dotcom: all the fault…, in reply to Kumara Republic,
Key in the all of this affair (KDC and TPPA) seems out of his depth, such a patsy. It would be surprising if his approach to negotiations (with the US in particular) was, “What you do want, when do you want it, how do you want it, OK it’s yours”.
-
Speaker: Key: Concession Not Recession, in reply to Graham Reid,
people who cannot spell
I look at spelling as an attempt to create my very own unique language.
About the time the thread went a tad “mardy”, I was going to respond along the lines of Key, horse and arse.
I do feel Key should have taken Banks to Hollywood, pretty sure they would have scored, in addition to the production, the starring roles for a remake of “Dumb & Dumber”.
-
Speaker: Key: Concession Not Recession, in reply to Alec Morgan,
A family member of mine has worked on the periphery of the film industry while a student in between breaks, and has been hit with a huge (for him) ACC bill as an independent contractor when he was clearly an employee. Thanks to ShonKey’s “Hobbit Enabling Act” and Cur Richard Taylor and Lord Jackson.
There is a limit at which ACC don't collect a levy if you are working self employed on a part time basis - The family member scenario you realte doesn't stack up.
With ACC there is an exemption so that if you don't earn much you don't pay much - So taking an example of s trudent who worked self employed, on a one off basis, in film production part time in their breaks from uni - and say they earned $8000.00 they would pay a levy of around $21.00, if they earned say $14,000.00 they would pay around $37.00. - these figures are using claulators on ACC Website.
Should family member have say worked in retail they would have paid ACC on every dollar they earnt and would not have (likely) earnt a lot less and would not have the advantage of being able to claim their work related expenses against their gross earnings.
Family member appears to me to be being disingenuous.
-
Speaker: Key: Concession Not Recession, in reply to Tom Semmens,
Hard News suffered a credibility blow from which it has never recovered - it is now largely a sporadic blog about media matters, generation x music nostalgia and advertorials for the Media 3 TV show. Russell Brown himself has said he wants and likes it that way now.
Of course, water under the bridge is water under the bridge. As far as I am concerned being wrong isn't a crime, but not learning from it is. I wonder how many people who regularly post here have learnt anything from being wrong over the Hobbit?
I find you point of view expressed above pretty conceited and insulting.
-
Speaker: Key: Concession Not Recession, in reply to Alec Morgan,
Go back and look at the state of the union at the time the 'Hobbit Dispute" was rolled out it had not been registered/establsihed and had not meet wih the people they purported to represent.
-
Legal Beagle: Kim Dotcom: all the fault…, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,
So Dot Com should initiate a judicial review on quite a range of matters?
-
Legal Beagle: Kim Dotcom: all the fault…, in reply to Matthew Poole,
Looking at the Intelligence and Security Committee Act 1996, I note that the Committee is explicitly forbidden to enquire “into any matter that is operationally sensitive, including any matter that relates to intelligence collection and production methods or sources of information”,
Consider the fruther revelations that will come with ongoing disclosure - The committee may be prevented from investigating matters that are going to be played out in public domain.
Oh the irony - the committee prevented from looking inside the "glass house".
-
had [Kim Dotcom] come to New Zealand at the time, without changes to the other laws, in particular GCSB's law, then his activities would not have been protected.
Key’s choice of language, or the language chosen for him, is interesting - "his activities would not have been protected" - the implication is KDC is up to no good and his activities and the law that protected them are the problem not the illegal surveillance.
The other part of the problem according to Key is the GCSB – however – if one has regard to Hagar’s Book “Secret Power” and “other research and comments” the culture at the GCSB is that individuals act in accordance with directions, are task focused and work largely in isolation of each other. Ther GCSB bods would likely have been working as directed.
To lay the problem at the feet of the “public servants” is to a degree disingenuous.
The Neazor report, as one expects, lacked the emphasis it should; have had.With the KDC signal variance/diversion it will be a revelation when the trace results by Telecom/(Gen I )are released and whether the equipment used to do the surveillance was borrowed/loaned and if so from whom?
Key is setting a new high watermark for dishonesty and incompetence.
-
Legal Beagle: Kim Dotcom: all the fault…, in reply to micky savage,
Hi Gregg.