OK, so I thought ‘grim’, right? But Hayden has brought receipts, as the saying goes… and his view is ‘absolutely ropeable’. Lol.
“Usually though, Luxon is accompanied by just one ally. For two years, across the Beehive and beyond, he’s been joined by a man who stands directly behind him looking absolutely ropeable. That man has a name: Hamish Rutherford… “
Photo montage by The Spinoff
The whole article, by one of my favourite current affairs writers, is worth a read. It’s amazing that Hamish held on for so long.
[Rutherford’s] message said: “It has been an absolute honour to work for Christopher Luxon both in Opposition and for the year since the election, but it has become clear to me over the past few months that I am not prepared to do the full term. I’m available until the end of the year as required.” Rutherford said he was looking forward to a decent summer break and wanted to spend more time with his family.
Well, he would say that.
Let’s face it, Christopher Luxon is a train wreck as prime minister — weak, clumsy, confused, jargon-riddled and indecisive. This brittle, two-faced little man doesn’t handle criticism, or even questioning, without getting petulant. He shoots his mouth off, facts be damned, and frequently comes across as dodgy and dishonest.
Luxon blames MMP and ‘the Coalition agreement’ for his own lack of leadership and vision, and his retrograde administration’s venal capitulation to various industry lobby groups and fringes. What a terrible embarrassment he has been so far. Such a lack.
I’m speculating, but I would say Hamish Rutherford must surely have become exasperated at Luxon’s continuous bungling of his role, and the frequent clean-up jobs and ‘clarifications’ required. Luxon’s tone-deaf pursuit of cheap laughs on TikTok must also be hard to stomach.
Good luck to Hamish. Notable that he actually deployed the ‘spend more time with family’ trope. I know how very tough these parliamentary roles are on relationships and family, so I’m sure there’s truth to this, even if it sounds like a cliché.**
That line “it has become clear to me over the past few months that I am not prepared to do the full term” speaks volumes. I for one would read Hamish’s tell-all memoir about his time working in that particular hothouse, if he were ever so inclined to write it.
In the meantime, Hamish’s days of frowning as he watches his deeply unlikable boss repeatedly muck up media interactions are now thankfully numbered, and that’s got to be a relief.
– P
** Update 27 Sept: a fuller reporting of Hamish’s message to the press gallery, courtesy of NZ Herald, elaborated:
“Several of you have messaged me this morning. I can confirm that I have resigned as chief press secretary,” Rutherford wrote.
“It has been an absolute honour to work for Christopher Luxon both in Opposition and for the year since the election, but it has become clear to me over the past few months that I am not prepared to do the full term. I’m available until the end of the year as required.
“In terms of what comes next, right now I’m looking forward to a decent summer break and spending more time with my family. The one consistent piece of parenting advice I’ve received is that you will miss your kids being small. Frankie was born less than a month after I started in 2022 so that’s the priority in the near term.”
The Prime Minister’s spin doctor Hamish Rutherford used to be a lot of fun. We were Twitter buddies back when he was working at The Dominion (later Fairfax); then he went to the NZ Herald as Wellington Business editor, for a wider circulation/better job security (ha!), I guess. There I noticed his tone got more and more trenchant, and quite often anti-(then)-Labour government. He was, as noted, supposedly a Business Editor, but often slid out of his lane into political commentary – and seemed (to me) to favour the Nats.
Maybe he was auditioning?
None of us were particularly surprised when he went to work for the (then) Leader of the Opposition, a newbie MP who apparently “used to run an airline” called Luxon – as his press secretary.
That’s Hamish Rutherford, on the right. But why so grim? Maybe it’s because he’s always cleaning up after his gaffe-prone boss?
I mean look, it’s not just Luxon’s latest (yesterday) “Well, I’m entitled to the entitlement” blunder :
Remember the ‘Sure, my wife (cough) has a Tesla, and yeah, we claimed the Clean Car Rebate for it, and yeah, now I want the taxpayer to buy another Tesla for me to use.”
It’s really like Luxon is accident-prone, and poor Hamish is part of the clean-up crew.
While he was away, [in Hawaii] a video was posted on his Facebook page where he claimed to be in Te Puke visiting businesses. In it, he spoke about provincial towns being the backbone of New Zealand. “Today I’m in Te Puke, the heart of kiwifruit country, and what a great morning we’ve had today,” it started. Luxon had in fact been to Te Puke the previous week, and had been on holiday when the post was made. He denied the post was misleading. “Yes, I was on leave last week with my family. I went to Hawaii with my family, as I tend to do in July,” he said.
Now don’t misunderstand me. I don’t feel sorry for Hamish Rutherford nor any of his no-doubt well-rewarded fellow press secretaries & media minder colleagues. No, not a bit. Cleaning up can be lucrative. “Where’s there’s muck there’s brass” as the old saying goes.
But it seems to me Hamish used to have more joie de vivre when he was a simple reporter/editor/bureau chief.
–P PS And he’s obviously far too flat-out busy cleaning up/clarifying Luxon’s missteps to even update his LinkedIn profile.
Wow. A mortgage free apartment, but he claims ‘accommodation expenses’ (really a taxpayer-funded allowance) of $1,000 per week – on top of his $471,000 pa salary and other benefits, etc etc.
The National Party CEO must be so used to the good life, eh?
The Prime Minister will receive a $52,000 top-up to his $471,000 salary to cover his accommodation expenses since he is not living in Premier House. A spokesperson for Christopher Luxon confirmed he will claim the optional accommodation payment, despite living in an apartment in Wellington that he owns mortgage-free.
I’m not partisan pearl-clutching, I promise. It’s striking to observe how this shallow, self-promoting neophyte seems SO out-of-touch, just as we were warned. I mean he literally told beneficiaries “the free ride is over” in his recent The-State-of-the-Nation-is-fragile speech:
From RNZ: https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/509471/watch-state-of-the-nation-is-fragile-christopher-luxon-says?
Free rides are over – but not if you’re the Prime Minister, they aren’t. -P
Radio NZ’s Farah Hancock has analysed the Electoral Commission returns of money paid to influence the 2023 NZ General Election. Her article $2m surge in election campaign spending by third-party groups (RNZ) shows that as well as the huge donations-directly-to-the-parties imbalance, previously reported, a large amount of untraceable dark money was expended by bodies established to support right wing (really anti-Labour, anti-Greens, anti-Maori Party) election efforts.
Third-party groups poured $2 million into the election campaign, new data reveals. Most of the record spend went on campaigners pushing for policies favoured by the centre right, and is 13 times more than was spent on the 2020 general election. Figures released by the Electoral Commission show that of the 31 registered third-party promoters, seven spent more than $100,000 in the lead-up to voting. Only groups that spend more than $100,000 are required to share their expenses.
[emphasis added]
The graphics Hancock prepared for her story are extremely… well, illustrative:
OK so this is a new thing. Hancock’s point that these stats only relate to the seven ‘promoters’ who admitted spending over $100,000 is important.
This is the roll call:
Vote for Better (who dat?) Taxpayers Union (dirty PR group/ACT Party in drag) Council of Trade Unions (traditional Labour supporters) Hobson’s Pledge (colonial/racist dinosaurs) Better NZ Trust (a zero carbon/pro EV lobby group) Family First (reactionary Christian nationalists) Groundswell (puppets of the National Party)
It was pretty clear before the General Election that the left was being vastly outspent by the right. A lot of anti-government sentiment (and advertising) was fuelled by these opaquely-funded bodies.
Vote for Better
Personally, I don’t believe bloodstock/advertising man Tim Barry who fronted the ‘Vote for Better’ money-laundering exercise when he claimed the oh-my-god-look-at-that-we’re-JUST-UNDER-the-legal-spending-cap! ‘promotion’ fund was funded by donations from “hundreds of New Zealanders from up and down the country”. Sure, Tim, sure. That’s not a lie (probably) but it doesn’t seem particularly ‘the whole truth’ either. Refusing to be interviewed about your $386,514 influence operation doesn’t fill me with confidence, either. And covering your tracks. As RNZ’s Farah Hancock reports: “The Vote for Better website and social media pages have been removed from the internet.” Riiiight. Always a good sign. Totally normal and legit.
David Seymour and his poodle/propagandist Jordan Williams, NZ Taxpayers Onion
Oh, these %#&@*! guys again. But with so much MORE MONEY
The NZ Taxpayers Union dirty PR attack machine likewise plays up its ‘ordinary New Zealanders’ donations’ – but is obstructive about how much its um, larger, corporate donors bankroll it. Nevertheless, we know tobacco giant British American Tobacco funds them, and (naturally, like a good servant) the Taxpayers Union dutifully parrots their PR lines…
We also know rich people poured money into National and ACT (masters of the Baldrick-like Jordan Williams). See this list of ‘big money donors’ to ACT (published August 2023, a month before the election). I wouldn’t be surprised if some these same “New Zealanders from up and down the country” flicked a few roubles into the ‘Vote for Better’ campaign. What’s to stop them? What do you think?
One of these two head bangers infringes the privacy of other people to attack them. Oh, hang on – they both do. (Pic: Rachel Glucina)
It’s an adage, almost a cliche: ‘Justice delayed is Justice denied’, but genuinely, that has to be one’s response to news this last week: That dirty PR attack blogger Cameron Slater has (finally) been judged in the High Court to have defamed Auckland businessman Matt Blomfield.
Further, that Slater’s false and damaging campaign of destruction of Blomfield’s reputation was not motivated by any principled conviction, ‘honest opinion’, or in pursuit of the ‘public interest’ as Slater had variously claimed. No, it was typically shabby: Slater carried out a vendetta for a former business colleague of Blomfield’s, it seems likely for reward or other ‘consideration’. Dirty PR for hire, as we have seen from this bantam rooster before.
Justice Johnstone’s 20 Feb 2024 High Court Judgment (available here, and archived below) stops slightly short of that making that ‘for hire’ point, at para 101
Mr Blomfield argued that Whale Oil must have been paid to publish the posts. He pointed to a photograph of Mr Slater in Las Vegas, taken when it appears Mr Powell and other associates were holidaying there, suggesting Mr Slater was being hosted. However, the evidence is insufficient to establish that Whale Oil received a financial advantage specifically for publishing the posts. That said, it is clear from the fact of their publication that Whale Oil expected to derive some benefit, whether in terms of attention, notoriety, enjoyment of others’ misfortune, or otherwise.
But readers of this blog will know there’s plenty of ‘Walks like a duck’-style evidence (if not proof) that Cameron Slater, like his paymaster/ghostwriter Carrick Graham, acted as a paid character assassin over the years. Sleazy, dishonest defamers. Heck, there’s even invoices.
The judge says (para 119)
Mr Blomfield’s evidence satisfied me that the personal impact of the defamatory statements published about him, relentlessly alleging a wide range of criminal activities, was extreme. I have described the nature of Whale Oil’s campaign against Mr Blomfield as amounting to a wholesale attack. It was undertaken maliciously, for reasons other than genuine belief in their truth. …
So, as I read that, another High Court judge has just described Cameron Slater a relentless, malicious liar. (Yeah, well that’s been my view for a while, eh? Check it out.)
While this week’s High Court judgment puts a cap on it…
I grant Mr Blomfield judgment, and award compensatory damages in the sum of $475,000, payable by each of Mr Slater and Social Media, jointly and severally.
…there’s no prospect of Blomfield receiving any payment from Slater (bankrupt) or his Whale Oil company Social Media Consultants Ltd (in liquidation). Being the slippery no-account loser that he is, Slater (“I never lose”) put himself into bankruptcy to avoid a previous court-ordered damages payment. Then, briefly flirting with a oh-no-I-don’t-own-the-shares-in-that-company-my-wife-Juana-does dumbarse ‘strategy’, he/they put Social Media Consultants Ltd into liquidation.
Thomson herself (probably doing PR for Blomfield, still) put out a press release heralding Justice Johnstone’s 20 February 2024 High Court judgment:
Auckland Man Resoundingly Defeats Cameron Slater And The Whale Oil Blog In Judgment On Longrunning Defamation Case
Press Release: Margie Thomson Friday, 23 February 2024, 8:53 am
Matt Blomfield fought for twelve years to clear his name from the defamatory attacks launched against him on the Whale Oil blog, owned and operated by Cameron Slater. The series of posts alleged a wide range of criminal activities, accusations that shattered Blomfield’s career and social standing.
In a judgment released today (attached below), Blomfield is completely vindicated, with Justice Johnstone of the High Court finding the Whale Oil posts to be ‘false and seriously defamatory’, written with malice, and with clear intention to destroy Blomfield’s reputation.
Compensatory damages of $475,000 are awarded to Blomfield.
The posts, published in 2012 when the Whale Oil blog attracted 317,000 views a month, ‘can only have been published for the ancillary purpose of fostering abusive and unjustified comments about Blomfield by commentators’, Justice Johnstone stated.
The story was recounted in the 2019 book ‘Whale Oil: One man’s fight to save his reputation, then his life’, by author Margie Thomson with a foreword by Nicky Hager. They are delighted and relieved that this judgment brings to an end the mighty effort he has been forced to expend in order to clear his name. ‘It took an exceptional man to keep going in the face of such an attack,’ Margie Thomson said, ‘let alone to take a defamation case through our legal system and not be squashed by the process.’
He never dreamed it was to take him twelve years.
As the malicious blogs appeared, Blomfield’s business opportunities fell away. The campaign against him did not just take place on the blog, but also manifested in relentless, nasty messages across a number of platforms to both him and his wife, and in a terrifying armed attack on the Blomfield’s home that he has always maintained was related, whether directly or indirectly, to the campaign of abuse. Johnstone set aside the matter of the attack.
At first, broke and with nothing to lose, Blomfield represented himself in his defamation proceedings, even though he had no legal training. Later he was represented by and had crucial support from Wellington barrister Felix Geiringer. For this final hearing in the High Court, which occurred in September 2023, he again represented himself.
The Whale Oil posts included material stolen from Blomfield’s own filing cabinet of documents, and a hard drive, which had been in the care of a former business associate. ‘Whale Oil has never fully explained the circumstances in which it gained access to this material’, Johnstone wrote in his judgment, despite several court orders that Slater do so. Justice Johnstone stated that ‘there can be no coincidence’ that the blog attacks happened following a falling out between Blomfield and that same business associate. This leads the judge to use the word ‘vendetta’ – a word already applied to this case by Justice Asher of the Appeal Court back in 2014. The Human Rights Review Tribunal in 2019 described the attack as ‘an extended assassination of [Blomfield’s] character’.
In his 34-page judgment, Johnstone outlines the delays that have stretched this case out over nearly a dozen years – ‘delays largely caused by Whale Oil’, designed to obstruct justice, in a litany of non-compliance, contempts of court, interlocutory applications and appeals.
While there have been earlier important steps along the way in this case, such as when Justice Davison in the High Court in October 2018 ruled Slater’s defence inadmissible, today’s comprehensive ruling by Johnstone is the final step: he has apportioned a value to the damage done and made a clear ruling of defamation.
Johnstone’s judgment provides strong validation of Blomfield’s long battle to clear his name and reputation from the defamation published by Whale Oil.
Scoop media
Now, that’s a clearly a release written from Team Blomfield, but you know what? Fair enough. Slater and his dirty PR crew of clients, enablers and acolytes had their run. According to Thomson’s book, ‘Operation Bumslide’ was Warren Powell, Marc Spring and Amanda Easterbrook, who with sleazebag Cameron Slater dreamt up various ways to make Blomfield’s life hell …
Just as Thomson/Blomfield says in that news release, J Johnstone’s High Court judgment released this week is detailed and damning. As well as the disorganised mess and utter vacuity of Slater’s so-called defences (“truth” and “honest opinion” – riiiight) Justice Johnstone comprehensively exposes Cameron Slater’s repeated efforts to delay and obstruct the fateful day he would be held accountable. Some extracts:
This is a fascinating conversation about the roots, the dangers and hype around AI. Both of these thinkers are so insightful about the issues, and raise issues in context with such clarity. I appreciate them so much. Watch the video from Al Jazeerah English at YouTube or below, and I have linked to a transcript (cough, GPT-generated, but groomed by me — any errors are my responsibility). Very worthwhile.
I admire these two public intellectuals very much. So good. I’ve found my own thinking benefits from the issues Meredith Whittaker raises, and her BS filter born from experience. Like her, Camille Francois is also a formidable intellect and brilliant communicator. I recommend you pay attention.
From TODAY FM archives — Wilhelmina Shrimpton and Simon Morrow take a deep dive into trolling and cyberbullying. From the high profile to the general public, Kiwis across all walks of life are being targeted, and some are paying the ultimate price. So what drives us to troll, who is behind the fake profiles, and what do we need to do to stop it?
This is worthwhile. Sad, infuriating, but worthwhile. Bravo to the team who produced this documentary – P
I cracked open a fortune cookie with a family group after dinner. My loved ones got warm, inspiring messages such as my son’s: ‘You will be successful in business and society’. Nice.
I got this one: “Friends come and go, but enemies accumulate.”
Hah! So true.
By coincidence, I had already drafted a longish blog post which detailed (and I mean detailed) the skulduggery of the most dishonest person whom it had been my misfortune to encounter in business for a long time.
Sure, some deals go wrong, and assurances made turn out to be unfulfilled, – for whatever ‘reason’ – and promises are broken. But I had concluded early on that this guy was crooked – he was, I quickly came to see, a cold-blooded liar and fantasist.
As the weeks elapsed since we concluded the deal, more and more of his dodgy AF actions have been exposed – to me and my advisors and various professionals. More skeletons in closets have been discovered, despite this man (and his co-conspirator spouse) taking extraordinary steps to try to cover their tracks.
In a remarkable series of events, material and information which I am certain they were trying hard to destroy (or at least conceal), found its way into our hands. Their fumbled efforts failed.
The thing is, I could fill you in on all this in excruciating detail here at The Paepae, as I fully intended to, and (to use accountant Matthew Gilligan’s memorable phrase) try ‘to remove this guy from the business gene pool’.
But read that fortune cookie. That’s given me food for thought.
I also recall the main lesson I learned from the last time I was engaged in (legal) warfare with a lying, malignant narcissist. I learned then that anyengagement prolongs your pain. You might ‘win’ as we did, but looking back, it is far better to extract the best you can from a situation early, and END IT.
Then do not re-engage.
On that score, I heard that a large-ish payment was suddenly received by some of his victims, I think in anticipation of a tribunal hearing.
Normally narcissists, believing they are the smartest people in any room, are convinced they can outsmart any person, or body, in any venue seeking to review their actions. In this case, it seems the breaches the wretch had made were so fundamental, so thoroughly documented (partly thanks to the information which came to us, tsk ), and they exposed him to so much potential legal jeopardy, his advisors apparently got him to capitulate – although he won’t see it in those terms, naturally.
Anyway, as it stands, my exposure to his malfeasance is limited to now rectifying problems caused by his disgraceful neglect and poor maintenance of an asset that he used to own, but now we do.
I don’t need any more enemies.
– P
PS I found this in my drafts folder, from two years ago. I’d forgotten all about it. That’s pretty good, isn’t it?
Via one of my lovely Twitter sources, the sardonic and interesting @johubris … the following ‘poll question’ has been recently distributed: “Thinking about your life and your country now, what is the most important issue that you want to see the New Zealand Government addressing?”
This qualifies as push-polling, as you’ll see, which is when a scummy so-called opinion pollster injects negative political attacks to seed an unfavourable view of their clients’ political opponent.
Have a read and see what you think.
Please select one only, it says, but you have read through their loaded, slanted description of ‘life in New Zealand’ under the present government, right?
RISING LIVING COSTS. The costs of everything are shooting up everywhere, and hard-working Kiwis need a break. ‘CANCEL CULTURE’ & POLITICAL CORRECTNESS. Pointless ‘woke’ arguments over everything from gender to ‘Maori science’ are dividing us when we need to work together. EDUCATION. Our schools are failing Kiwi kids. It’s time for real reform to give our children the best possible start. CO-GOVERNANCE. We need to stop the Government’s push to divide NZ by race, from housing to 3 Waters and welfare. NZ’s HOSPITALS & HEALTHCARE. We need fresh ideas and real investment to drive up standards. THE HOUSING CRISIS. Real action is needed to make it cheaper to buy, build and rent homes for Kiwis. GETTING THE ECONOMY GROWING AGAIN. We need to see some real changes to kick-start our economy. CRIME, LAW & ORDER AND GANGS. Much stronger action is needed to reduce violent crime in our community. CLIMATE CHANGE. It is time for real action to protect NZ’s precious environment and hit our carbon targets.
From the polling ‘questions’ — A little crushed glass with your soup, madam?
Now, given his history as a National Party activist, (and one of John Key’s Dirty Politics foot soldiers) the party’s long-time pollster, who happens to own a polling company (Curia), David Farrar has immediately fallen under suspicion as the originator of this skulduggery.
Why do I call it skulduggery? Because push-polling is widely regarded as dirty politics and a misinformation technique; see this explanation from slide 20 of a deck ‘Government and Politics AP Review‘
Embedding ‘lies’ or negative slants in your polling questions just makes you look like a deceitful political operative … oh, wait.
In the past, David Farrar has denied doing this shit. Maybe two terms in Opposition for his beloved National Party has um, … loosened his morals?
Sure, sure: he’s innocent until proven guilty, yada yada, but boy, those questions sure read like a set of desperate Tory negative talking points, wouldn’t you say? If not Farrar, someone a lot like him, eh?
– P
Update 31/3/23: Oh, apparently there’s been a denial …
In this age of entitled white men behaving badly, it’s common to hear the term “malignant narcissist”
Anyone who’s had the misfortune to be sucked into the orbit or one of these miscreants, (let alone been obliged to, say, sue one for copyright infringement) eventually learns that the ONLY ‘exit strategy’ is to completely disengage from their bullying, manipulation and gaslighting.
You don’t win a war with one of these psychic energy sinkholes. At best you come out on top in a skirmish and discontinue hostilities — you’ll leave the field with (at least) scratches and bite-marks. You may, as I did in that case, eke out a small victory, strike a blow, achieve a settlement, get a pay-out, whatever.
You may also retrieve some of your own reputation – which the narcissist will have smeared, comprehensively, in the course of his ‘dispute’ with you. He will have beguilied some idiots (looking at you Sean Plunket) and made even some of your friends doubt you; some of them will accuse you of somehow aiding and abetting the narcissist’s campaign against you, or suggesting you ‘added’ to the problem, drawing it out.
But in the end, let me assure you: there is nothing whatsoever to be gained from prolonging engagement with one of these characters. Nothing. Let go. Walk away.
So watching David Farrier’s excellent, disturbing documentary film ‘Mister Organ‘ last night reminded me of bygone days – not exactly warm nostalgia, but thankfully, not PTSD, either.
Who is ‘playing’ whom?
Given the power imbalance in the making of a documentary, one might think that the filmmaker has all the advantages, seeing as how they can frame the narrative, and edit what we the audience see/hear, and in what sequence. But to his credit, Farrier made it quickly apparent that the subject, [alleged] filthy liar and fantasist Michael Organ, was actually more astute. It reminded me of that adage: ‘Never argue with an idiot. They’ll drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.’
‘The hunter becomes the hunted’ is another cliche, we’ve all heard, right? It was clear, fairly early in the film, that the delusional-but-not-untalented Michael Organ was extremely psychologically invested in the serious ‘game’ he was playing — and that his goal was to turn the tables, to confuse, destabilise, bewilder, and to punish David Farrier.
Whatever Farrier hoped, Organ’s fantasy life wasn’t going to collapse like a house of cards once he was exposed as the lying manipulative bully that he appears to be. Indeed, as the film lays out in awful, creepy detail, Michael Organ appears to be clearly energised by the battle of wits, exercising his ‘power’ against his victims, endlessly spinning his [debunked] fantasies and lies, even if the battle is for an ever-diminishing pile of ashes.
I worked with someone who, just like Michael Organ is portrayed in the film, knew how to find pressure points, inventing disputes if necessary, to manipulate and throw others off-balance so he could continue to take advantage of them. I formed the view then that this type of person needs to dominate others, to define themselves as the peak of the pyramid, and to (in effect) rob others, sucking their life-energy. Sounds dramatic, I know, sorry. But you had to be there.
I also later had the misfortune to be involved in a business purchase where the vendor turned out to be very much a bully, a liar and a narcissist — oppressing his family and employees with threats, broken promises, outbursts of nasty hot anger. And lies of course. Endless lies
Farrier’s film, cataloguing as it does Michael Organ’s victims, and those too afraid (justifiably, from experience) to speak out against Organ is horrifying. Honestly, these types get away with so much, for so long.
All of which is to say: GO — Go and see David Farrier’s movie ‘Mister Organ‘. I highly recommend it. It is an exceptional piece of documentary filming. I saw it last night and woke up feeling anxious for Farrier this morning.
No way is this over. Sorry.
‘Mister Organ‘, the film, is probably only Part Two of the tale of Michael Organ and David Farrier. (Part One being his series of articles about Organ’s crazed wheel clamping at Bashford Antiques hosted over at The Spinoff: The incredibly weird tale behind the Bashford Antiques clamping story.)
Michael Organ (still from David Farrier’s documentary MISTER ORGAN – aptly a Madman production)
The psychic attention boost that this film and attendant publicity will give Michael Organ will, I predict, stimulate and energise him. It’ll top-up what someone in the film called the ‘demonic’ side of Michael Organ. It will provoke him. God knows how it will end.
Poor David.
– P
Facts are stated to the best of my knowledge and commentary is my honest opinion. Corrections or clarifications are always welcome by email. Comments are open, but may be moderated.
– Best wishes, Peter Aranyi
Duncan Greive* at The Spinoff has published a really worthwhile interview with the rich, white, social conservative businessman Wayne Wright whose wealth is funding that internet radio platform, ‘The Platform’, which I cited recently. (And which seems to me to be inching its way towards Alex Jones InfoWars/Qanon/antivax ‘conspiracy’ territory.)
If you’re interested in media in New Zealand, this is essential reading:
Wayne Wright and his mum Chloe are apparently the decision-makers behind the funding of Sean Plunket’s um, new media outlet. Click to read at TheSpinoff.co.nz
Seriously, go and read it at The Spinoff. (Make sure you have something in your stomach.)
Oh? He’s a big fan of Mike Hosking?
Apparently Wayne Wright is enormously impressed with Mike Hosking.
Also, funny that Wayne Wright mentions he loved Paul Henry too. Of course some of us remember that Paul Henry and Mike Hosking were both secretly funded (lol) by casino operator SkyCity … to act as ‘SkyCity Ambassadors’. That meant using their media platforms (Hosking NewsTalkZB and TVNZ at the time; Paul Henry at RadioLIVE) to give SkyCity executives long, soft blowjobs— I mean interviews … and to generally be, well, (sorry boys) “in the pocket of SkyCity” seems an apt way to describe it. (Hosking said he worked for that money. Oh yes, I’m sure.)
Update: Here’s a picture of Chloe Wright with National MP Chris Bishop:
Wright Family Foundation Chief Executive Chloe Wright with National MP Chris Bishop.
Anyway, I for one welcome Wayne Wright and Chloe Wright coming out of the woodwork to stand up for their previously secret funding – well, confidential, for a while, anyway. (I recall Plunket being unwilling to tell Duncan last time he asked.) But you will know them by their fruits, as someone said …
You Will Know Them by Their Fruits Matthew 7:15-20 15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? 17 Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Therefore by their fruits you will know them.
I’ve been thinking about that 23 day protest at Parliament earlier this year, in the light of the Stuff Circuit ‘Fire and Fury’ documentary (highly recommended) and recent promotion by religious spruiker Brian Tamaki, and others, of another march to Parliament Grounds planned for next week. This one, apparently, promises mock “People’s trials” on the steps of Parliament. Ugly.
Televangelist and twice-failed mainstream political force ‘EFTpos-tle’ Brian Tamaki has “commanded” his followers to attend – even if they can’t get leave to do so approved by their employers. “Me and god would be disappointed…” he said in a video message (below) to the faithful. (Oh boy. Where do I start?) Tamaki’s Wikipedia entry is instructive:
“Brian Raymond Tamaki (born 2 February 1958), is a New Zealand fundamentalist Christian religious leader and right-wing political activist. A Tainui man from the Ngati Ngawaero and Ngati Maniapoto tribes, he is the leader of Destiny Church, a pentecostal Christian organisation in New Zealand which advocates strict adherence to fundamentalist biblical morality, and is notable for its position against homosexuality, its patriarchal views, and for its calls for a return to biblical conservative family values and morals. He has also stated the COVID-19 pandemic is a sign the world has “strayed from God”, which led to widespread condemnation, with one Anglican vicar describing Tamaki as “dangerous”. This, alongside many comments he has made, and how he has amassed a large fortune by preaching the prosperity gospel to a mostly working-class audience, has made him a controversial figure in New Zealand.
His church has led a strong campaign that opposes COVID-19 vaccination, lockdowns and mask mandates since the pandemic began in New Zealand, and are currently engaging in protests against mandates at Parliament. In 2022 Tamaki was being briefly imprisoned for breaching bail conditions as he took part in an anti-vaccination protest in Christchurch. In the same year, following its failure to file, Destiny Church’s charity status was revoked.”
Police will be monitoring a protest led by Destiny Church’s Brian Tamaki that intends marching through central Wellington before staging a mock trial at Parliament. New details have emerged of the rally set to take place on August 23 that will see protesters from across New Zealand assemble at Civic Square before marching to Parliament where they will hold a self-styled “people’s court”. Police today said they were aware of the protest activity planned for Wellington later this month but would not say if they were in talks with Tamaki about the day. “We recognise the lawful right to protest,” said a spokesperson. “Police will be monitoring the event and will be working to ensure there is limited disruption to the wider public.”
No doubt the scenes in this TVNZ 1News video of the final day of the February-March anti-mandate/anti-vax/anti-government protest will be playing on some decision-makers’ minds…
Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it …
The deceit at play in this
It surprises me (but it shouldn’t really) that there are still people trying to portray that protest as all about ‘peace and love’.
Here’s a fantastic interview by Moana Maniapoto talking with law professor and courageous public intellectual Jane Kelsey, on her retirement from university life.
The whole 17 minutes is really worth watching. It’s good to place Prof Kelsey in context with this brief, accessible retrospective look. She has always struck me as an articulate, determined, fiercely heroic, yet humble person.
Jane Kelsey has featured on this blog, last noting her involvement in the 2013 mass protests against National Party PM John Key’s unpopular strengthening of New Zealand’s security apparatus. See ‘Stop the GCSB Bill’ rallies and marches today where I captioned my photo of her (right), ‘Living treasure Professor Jane Kelsey addresses the Auckland Stop the GCSB Bill rally.’ (Yeah, OK, I gushed. But she is dynamite.)
Key took a ‘damn the protesters’ approach, seemingly determined to widen the surveillance powers the GSCB in the face of fierce public opposition, and pushing through legislation to increase the avenues in which those powers could be used. Notably, the law changes (recently defended by his ‘Minister of Spooks’ Chris Finlayson in his typical petulant fashion, even taking the time to name-check and smear Dame Anne Salmond like a twat) broadened the definition of ‘national security’ issues to allow for ‘protection’ of the ‘economic well-being’ of New Zealand i.e. commercial interests.
So, say, dairy farming giant Fonterra or, oil and gas exploration ventures, or, I guess, pig farms — you know, businesses sometimes targeted by activists and protesters over their environmental ethics and behaviour. The government can now potentially use espionage/terrorism powers and the associated secret police agencies to ‘protect’ these private enterprises. So, same old conservative Industrial Age mindset that got the planet where it is now.
It wasn’t the first time I felt John Key was motivated by some off-stage agreement or assurance he’d given one our overseas economic and security partners. He just seemed impervious to reasonable counter argument at times. Puzzling.
‘The disinformation era’
Jane Kelsey’s reflections on what Moana refers to as “the new era of protest” are also worth quoting in part, relevant as they are to recent themes:
“In the 1970s and 80s, there were lots of small protests erupted — Eva Rickard on the Raglan golf course [ …] Bastion Point, Pākaitore, of course lots of anti-Nuclear protests. But it was before the disinformation era. […] One of the things I always insisted on in protests was that it was accurate information. And now we’ve lost that. And that’s where I think a lot of the power of protest risks being lost, because it’s been devalued.”
Enjoy the video (thank you Moana and Cameron Bennett) with its evocative call to action by Prof Kelsey at the end.
Funny to catch a glimpse of a law professor’s Conviction History Report. All that ‘trespassing’. Tsk tsk. Lol. (Notably, non-violent protest.)
– P
PS Yeah, I saw what Jane Kelsey said about about avoiding ‘personalising’ the debate or denigrating opposing arguments. Prof Kelsey would probably not have called Cameron Slater a knuckle dragger as I did yesterday, or Chris Finlayson a twat. Oops. Oh well, as Slater told me during one of our coffee catch-ups back in the day: At least you won’t die wondering what I think.
