Exclusive Brethren

Comment of the Day

As pressure mounts on the nefarious manipulation of Kim Dotcom pressure will mount for the leftwing to be consistent.

One commenter notes:

A few elections back the left were mortified that a few Exclusive Brethren were trying to have some say in our elections…. where’s that outrage now?

Helen Clark and Trevor Mallard in particular made much of strange secretive “chinless scarf wearers” involving themselves in the political process.¬† Read more »

McCarten thinks John Key cares that a Maori Cult dislike him

Matt McCarten has turned his brain off and written a silly, snarky piece for Herald on Sunday about how unpopular John Key apparently is with the Exclusive Bro-thren’s.

I have called them a cult church and I will repeat it again, they are the Exclusive Bro-thren. Who cares if a bunch of sect Maori like you or not?  They even changed the rules banning women speaking on a Marae when it suited them.  When rules are changed for Metiria Turei to speak you know those extending the pleasure are an extremist bunch of nutters belonging on a list with Destiny Church.

McCarten has gone all whiny again about the sacking of Kate Wilkinson and a guy I have already forgotten. Phil? The guy who John Key  stuck his neck out for before.

Given they only got told about it hours before their dear leader gratuitously humiliated them revealed something ugly in Key’s psychological makeup.¬† Read more »

Poseur Alert – Turia smacks out Shearer for being a “poser”

Tariana Turia has not taken much time at all to sledge out David Shearer for attempting to cuddle up to the Exclusive Bro-thren aka Ratana.

Labour leader David Shearer has said he will gun for the Maori Party electorate seats next year, exploiting the uncertainty in the party – but co-leader Tariana Turia has retaliated, saying Mr Shearer was a poser and Maori people would see right through him.

…¬† Read more »

If not the Greens then who? And for what?

Yesterday I was contacted by a Greens spokeperson who categorically denied that the Greens were involved in the sneaky job posted on Seek and Trademe that Keeping Stock highlighted.

I accept their assurances that this isn’t them.

Though it does raise the question as to who it might be and what is the cause that requires so much sneakiness.

Could it be Colin Craig and his campaign against Marriage Equality..or someother anti group associated with that?

Or perhaps a Tobacco company lobbying against plain packaging?

Or even the Exclusive Brethren involving themselves again?

At least they aren’t The Brethren

It’s nice to see that Labour politicians don’t hate all religions.

Local politicians, volunteers and members of the Christchurch chapter of the Church of God have worked together to help tidy up their earthquake-hit community.

Pastor James Kim said yesterday’s event was part of an annual environmental cleanup day, which also aimed to help lift the spirits of residents who had been troubled by the earthquakes.

About 80 volunteers tackled litter, mowed lawns at abandoned homes and cleared silt along New Brighton Rd.

Six local politicians also joined the working bee, which was “really great encouragement and inspiration”, Kim said.

“It’s good to take action, even if it’s just a little step.”

Good on Lianne Dalziel for doing god’s work with some fundies. It is a little different from what she has had to say about the Exclusive Brethren in times past:

Then we had the disgraceful actions of the¬†Exclusive Brethren, which not only sought to discredit the Government of the day, and the Green Party, in targeted brochures that failed…

Green Vandals still at it

There has been more Green party-linked hoarding attacks last night in West Auckland.

Despite being busted and Russel Norman fessing up in the face of the evidence released on this blog they have not stopped.

National should lay complaints formerly with the Police and with the Electoral Commission.

Russel Norman’s executive assistant was donkey deep involved in this she needs to assist Police in identifying all the green operatives behind the continued vandalism.

I wonder too if Parliamentary Services needs to be¬†involved¬†to ascertain that their email servers weren’t used to facilitate this orchestrated, corrdinated nationawide attack on National’s billboards.

The Green party and the media went after the Exclusive Brethren and tracked down the printers and obtained invoices, why are they not doing the same here. Seems they are more interested in whether or not John Banks called Don Brash a “strange fellow” or not.

Meanwhile wanton, organised, expensive vandalism is being perpetrated but 50 or so green aligned activists with little or no media scrutiny.

The Shield of Sanctimony will not Protect the Greens, Ctd

Russel Norman is pleading ignorance of the machinations of his EA. Despite the evidence that this was being planned several months ago.

I wonder though if he isn’t being just a wee bit too sanctimonious in his grovelling.

The stickers used has slogans like “Drill It!”, “Mine it!”, Sell it!”.

Eeerily similar to what Meteria Turei tweeted last week:

That's what i read @ havent seen the NatParty enviro policy bt assume its just one page with "FUCK IT" written on the middle #Votenz
@metiria
Metiria Turei

Russel Norman is using¬†plausible¬†deniability in his excuse making but I’m not sure I believe him.

The Greens got upset in 2005 when the Exclusive Brethren organised and distributed pamphlets. They authorised their pamphlets though. The Greens activists did no such thing. Back in 2005 Don Brash was asked if he knew anything about the campaign, he denied knowing anything.

Has Russel Norman had his Don Brash moment? Is it really¬†believable¬†that he didn’t know anything about this campaign when his executive assistant was front and centre involved in organising this attack on national’s billboards? There were more than 50 activists involved in this. It was on a scale far larger than the Brethren and the 6 or so men¬†involved¬†in that. It isn’t conceivable that senior Greens didn’t know about his.

I think there are many more questions to be answered by the Green party.

I can’t wait until someone tracks down the printer of the stickers and pulls the invoice.

Would she comment on the Brethren?

Annette King is suddenly all tolerant when Shane Jones and a few other MPs spoke at Destiny Church’s meeting at the weekend.

Asked about Mr Jones’ attendance at the conference, Labour deputy leader Annette King said MPs were allowed to go most places.

“I haven’t really got a comment to make whether he went to Destiny Church, Catholic church, to Presbyterian church or no church.”

She had no comment about Destiny Church’s views.

She does however have numerous views on whether or not people can make appointments or meet with the Exclusive Brethren

General Debate 10 Sep 2008

Hon ANNETTE KING¬†… in my diary, so I just went. I saw him. I am not quite sure who set it up.‚ÄĚ John Key also said exactly that about the¬†Exclusive Brethren. He said the¬†Exclusive Brethren had an appointment in his diary, he did not know who set it up, and he does not even …

Imprest Supply Debate 6 Aug 2008

Hon ANNETTE KING¬†… flops, his lack of principles, his memory loss, his confused statements, his insecurity, his secret dealings with the¬†Exclusive Brethren, and his own comment about the stealing of emails from Don Brash‚Äôs office, which he tried to blame on the Labour Party?…

General Debate 21 May 2008

Hon ANNETTE KING¬†… in New Zealand. It is an agenda that would see a return to the master-servant relationship that was promised to the¬†Exclusive Brethren in 2005. Already we have National members of Parliament going around speaking to business groups and telling them that …

Electoral Finance Bill - In Committee 11 Dec 2007

Hon ANNETTE KING¬†… may have had a different result. They were not prepared to own up. In fact, Mr Brash could not remember meeting the¬†Exclusive Brethren. John Key still does not remember receiving the email about the money that was being spent. Is it not amazing that he …

General Debate 16 May 2007

Hon ANNETTE KING¬†… has had to own up. That man was a former police officer in Dunedin. He is the same man who was employed by the¬†Exclusive Brethren to dig up dirt on the Prime Minister and on Labour MPs and their families. He is a proven liar. Wayne Idour lied to …

Political Funding‚ÄĒSources 24 Jul 2008

Hon ANNETTE KING¬†… and now there is no accountability as to where that money came from, what trust it came from, whether it was from the¬†Exclusive Brethren, or whether it was from the fishing industry, the insurance industry, or the tobacco industry. The money went into the …

Hon ANNETTE KING¬†… vehicle it is‚ÄĒcontrolled and managed by Mr Browne, along with Mr McCully, to hide its donations from people like the¬†Exclusive Brethren. I think any questions about the Spencer Trust would have to be directed to New Zealand First.

Election Advertising‚ÄĒPolitical Party Logos 24 Jun 2008

Hon ANNETTE KING¬†… it has to say where its money comes from, and it has to declare whether the money comes from its big backers like the¬†Exclusive Brethren. That is what National does not like.

Electoral Finance Act‚ÄĒElection Advertising 6 Mar 2008

Hon ANNETTE KING¬†I think the issue of putting proper addresses on authorisation came out of theExclusive Brethren pamphlets, where addresses at which no one lived were put on. Fake addresses were put on, and the National Party …

Hon ANNETTE KING¬†No, I have not received any advice on that, but it is a very interesting idea, and, obviously, I think the¬†Exclusive Brethren‚ÄĒ

Hon ANNETTE KING¬†… to do it. In response to the question, I say that no, I have not received any advice on that, but I would say to the¬†Exclusive Brethren that if they are planning the sort of campaign they had last year, they too ought to get advice from the Electoral …

Electoral Finance Bill‚ÄĒInterpretation of Clause 80(d) 6 Dec 2007

Hon ANNETTE KING¬†I think my colleague is right‚ÄĒnot the¬†Exclusive Brethren.

Another classic case of weapons grade hypocrisy from Annette King. Every other denomination in new Zealand is fine for Labour MPs to meet but not the Exclusive Brethren. For them Annette King and Labour reserve nothing but denigration and abuse.

They are despicable hypocrites.

 

DPS and the PM

John Key attacked at Waitangi

Just¬†yesterday¬†I mentioned that Labour had stolen National’s election year play book…from 2002. Today we have seen yet more proof that they can’t see the wood for the trees. Perhaps Pete Hodgson and trevor Mallard can sit down with Murray McCully and have a chat about how the wood/trees issue is going to pan out for them.

Meanwhile fresh from displaying naked opportunism and hypocrisy over Government use of the airforce, Labour’s chief dirt digger Pete Hodgson is on TV tonight criticising John Key for his Diplomatic Protection Squad (DPS) security detail.

Labour really needs to get a grip and stop flinging random mud hoping some will stick. it’s the trees/wood thing I have previously mentioned. We get that labour hates John Key, and that they think he is a rich prick, we get that, the problem is we want to hear what Labour is going to do about things like the $300 million we are borrowing per week to pay for their promises.

But back to the issue of the DPS. Firstly, I’d be very concerned if John Key was telling the police how to do their jobs or how they should arrange their rosters.  I’d expect the Prime Minister to be wise enough to leave security to those who are experts at it.

The Prime Minister was actually attacked in 2009 at Waitangi.¬†And guess who got the blame for the ‚Äėembarrassing breach of security‚Äô ? Why yes ‚Äď it was the DPS.

John Key attacked at Waitangi

The security breach even alarmed Phil Goff and he;

‚Äėsent the Prime Minister a message that he hopes he wasn’t harmed‚Äô

Others on the left also commented:

‚ÄėIn any other country than New Zealand such an attack would have been treated extremely seriously. It is difficult to imagine that a person found guilty of assaulting the President of the United States would be at liberty to harangue him again, from a dangerously short distance, just two years later.‚Äô

The DPS just can‚Äôt win with Labour or TVNZ. They’re either too slack or too careful.

Back in 2007,¬†¬†TVNZ was among those¬†claiming incompetence when Helen Clark‚Äôs home was ‚Äėtagged‚Äô and a robber hid in her yard:

Questions are being raised about the competence of the Prime Minister’s security team after two embarrassing incidents for her minders.

The Sunday News claims security at Helen Clark’s Auckland home is being reviewed, after a man who had robbed a dairy was able to hide out in the backyard.

As well as the incident involving the robber, the Diplomatic Protection Squad also failed to stop youths from tagging the PM’s house, and several others in her Mt Eden street.

And what was Clark’s response at the time? http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/196757

‚ÄėClark, who is on holiday, was not available for comment but a source said she was fuming over the breaches.‚Äô

So rightly, the DPS reviewed their procedures yet¬†again.¬† The same story tells us they‚Äôd already boosted Helen Clark’s security after an encounter with a member of the Exclusive Brethren.

‚ÄėShe is now routinely shadowed by two or more DPS staff.‚Äô

Yet tonight, Hodgson’s¬†complaining there’s¬†too much Prime Ministerial protection and telling¬†police how to do their jobs¬†because¬†he knows best.¬† Goff needs to haul him into line.¬† If, God forbid, something¬†happened to the PM or his family Labour¬†would be stranded¬†on the wrong side of public opinion (yet again). And it‚Äôs not as if there haven‚Äôt been any threats.

‚ÄėGet someone to assassinate the prime minister, the new one, next year‚Äôs one. Just been in office five days, bang ‚Ķ Yeah, John Key ‚Ķ just drop a bomb ‚Ķ Just wait till he visits somewhere and just blow them ‚Ķ They won‚Äôt even find you.‚Äô

One more thing:

Dodgy Pete is suggesting the increase in the DPS bill is all about John Key. Clearly trying to smear Key as precious and soft. But even his fellow traveller Trevor Mallard has the sense to recognise that the DPS look after more than just the PM:

‚ÄėTheir job is to protect the Governor General, the PM, international political visitors and diplomats when there is a security issue.‚Äô

Have we had VIPs recently? Like a Prince, or the US Secretary of State, or other Foreign Leaders?  Did this contribute to the cost?  Of course it will have.

I even recall Don Brash had security allocated to him for a time when he was Opposition Leader, but unfortunately for invisible Phil Goff he’s clearly not deemed to be at risk.  Envy perhaps?

It’ll be interesting to see whether Goff gets protection for this year’s campaign.  Although now his wife’s acting as his chauffeur Рmaybe she’ll just multi-task.

UPDATE:¬†Perhaps embarrassingly for Goff… I’ve just found a video where he talks about getting the DPS to ride Triumphs with him to Christchurch in the unlikely event that he becomes PM. (04:11)

Compare and Contrast

In 2005 a small but enthusiastic church decided to get involved in politics. They offered on the ground support in many electorates and an even smaller group decided to put their money where their mouth was and spend their own money telling the truth about the Green party.

What ensued was a despicable attack on the church, in the media, and in the law and resulted ultimately in one of the most spiteful and anti-democratic pieces of legislation curtails our democratic freedoms, the Electoral Finance Act.

When this small group of people entered the political world thy were vilified. Trevor Mallard repeatedly called them “chinless scarf wearers”. Other Labour MPs, referred to them as a ‚Äúweird, secretive religious sect‚ÄĚ and ‚Äúblatant liars‚ÄĚ.¬†Ruth Dyson threatened to end their ability to claim benefit of a longstanding employment law exemption for conscientious objectors. The vilification continues today long after the events of 2005;

But the scumbag employers‚ÄĒpeople like the¬†Exclusive Brethren – Trevor Mallard, 2008, Employment Relations Amendment Bill

All because they dipped into their own pockets and told the truth about the Green party. Remember, not a single thing was ever refuted in their brochures, byt the Greens or anyone else. They were vilified and an anti-democratic law passed simply because they opposed the government of the day.

Contrast that to the recent local body elections, particularly in Auckland and particularly in the campaign to win Len Brown the mayoralty.

Just four days before the official election date Bernard Orsman wrote in the NZ Herald:

Union leaders and the churches have mobilised South Aucklanders like never before to get out and vote for Mr Brown, while the Banks camp has struggled to match the effort, particularly on the North Shore, where the vote is barely more than 20 per cent.

Curious? Where was the resulting vilification of church leaders that were going around collecting ballot papers and running ballot filling in lessons at their churches? Where was the media door-stepping Len Brown’s campaign team and Len Brown himself asking about the scret back-room deals he had made with the church leaders in South Auckland?

Just two weeks later Brnard Orsman was writing, again in the NZ Herald, about the stunning result of Len Brown:

In a turnaround from a low voter turnout at the 2007 local body elections, Mr Brown’s campaign team mobilised South Aucklanders through churches and unions to vote in equal numbers to residents in the other major cities.

Again, where is the outrage from the media about the¬†blatant¬†collusion of a candidate with churches in the political process. Nowhere is where. Lefty commentators like Brian Rudman (who wants millions pf ratepayers money spent on theatres) haven’t commented at all about the involvement of the churches in len brown’s victory yet felt compelled to write about the repeal of the Electoral Finance Act thus;

Repealing the Electoral Finance Act is the easy part. Now the National Party and its governing allies have to reveal whether they’re happy to return to the law of the jungle which allowed wacko sects like the Exclusive Brethren to run secret $1 million pro-National campaigns with impunity.

Once again vilifying citizens and their democratic right to freedom of speech and of spending their own money. “Where’s my Theatre” Rudman makes several factual errors in his statement. The may be wacko but it was their money, and they had as much right to spend money as the unions did supporting Labour. Plus it wasn’t secret, it could hardly be secret they mailed and delivered the brochures to nearly every household in New Zealand. An lets not quibble of the fact that they never spent a million dollars anyway.

One of very same people who once called one group of religious adherents “chinless scarfwearers” is now crowing about the result in Auckland.

Labour Party Mayor of the Supercity with a clear centre left majority. Key’s nightmare.

So for Trevor Mallard, when a religious group helps his opponents they are to be vilified in the parliament with no re-dress and when his own team use churches in exactly the same way that is to be lauded as a win for the left. Clearly he subscribes to the view that it’s ok if we do it but not them.

Now don’t get me wrong here, I am not saying that there was any nefarious deal done between Brwon and the churches, nor am I saying that the churches shouldn’t have been involved. I am merely comparing and contrasting the treatment of churches that supported National in 2005 and churches that supported and aided Labour run campaign of Len Brown.

Labour politicians were very quick to rush to vilify a religious group when they opposed them, and very, very grateful that the churches rallied to support their candidate in the local body elections. I am just wanting to show the utter hypocrisy of Labour politicians and our left leaning mainstream media.

Think for a moment if Rudman or Orsman had discovered that Destiny Church were mobilising to help John Banks. Would they have written just two lines mentioning church help in the Banks campaign, or would there have been a media frenzy of outrage an opprobrium that a religious group was aiding and abetting John Banks. I think you all know the answer to that question.