Robert Jones

[EXCLUSIVE] The Internet Party strategy revealed

Bd96K8mCYAA9XKNThe Internet Party has been announced today by Kim Dotcom, complete with logo resplendent in the corporate colours of Orcon.

This story though reveals the background behind the party and the key people involved in the formation of the party including the exclusive release of leaked documents that outline their strategy and plans to hoodwink the public into voting for what is emerging as a left-wing front and political subterfuge.

The money:

The strategy paper (below) reveals that Martyn Bradbury is working for Kim Dotcom and is charging him $8000 per month plus GST for political strategy, on top of a $5000 payment to allow him to upgrade his computer, cellphone and tablet devices.

Bradbury refused to answer his phone despite messages and numerous calls. Bear in mind that Bradbury has also been on the parliamentary payroll for the MANA Party.

On top of that we can reveal that Wellington barrister Graeme Edgeler apparently also consulted to the Dotcom party and charged $3000 plus GST for a report into two electorates.Upper Harbour and Auckland Central. When we spoke to Graeme Edgeler he refused to comment on clients despite repeated questions regarding the nature of the report and billing arranges, his constant refrain was that he “refused to talk about clients”.

Then just yesterday Martyn Bradbury wrote a post about the pending Dotcom party where he stated:

I think all those urban professional male Gen X National Party voters who don?t derive an income from the Dairy Industry will find Kim Dotcom?s economic vision a genuine way forward and they will find it difficult not to vote for him.

Urban professional male Gen X National Party voters vote National out of default, appeal to their logical sensibilities and watch them change that vote. Many would feel their cosmopolitan skin crawl at the idea Key will cut a deal with a religious social conservative like Colin Craig and while that disgust isn?t enough to make them vote Labour or Greens (and they aren?t crazy enough to vote NZ First), Dotcom?s Party could very well be their protest vote in 2014.? Read more »

The confusing position of the Greens

I have been watching with facinatation the Greens position on the poisoning of our bread by the Australian’s under the guise of mass medication.

The Greens certainly are a strange lot. On one hand they want to limit and ban almost everything for the good of us and force us to do other things and just recently they have come out against the mass medication of our bread.

This to me didn’t resonate. Normally the Greens are all into forcing us to do something for the grater good and so mass medication through fortifying our bread with folic acid seemed to right up thwir ally. Why are they opposed to it.

A quick check through Google soon revealed the hypocrisy of Sue Kedgley.

In July 2006 she said;

“While we are generally supportive of the proposal to fortify flour with folate, in the hope that it will reduce the numbers of babies being born with spina bifida and provide other health benefits, we believe this can be done in a way which doesn’t erode consumer choice”

Right so just 3 years ago they were “generally supportive” of poisoning us with folate, including those of us who aren’t, can’t or won’t get pregnant, all for the good of 60 babies per annum. It isn’t like they wanted to only exempt organic bread either;

“If fortification takes place at the bakery rather than milling stage, then some bread lines could be available for consumers who may wish to avoid folate enriched flour for health, cultural or other reasons. Consumers currently have the choice of whether they wish to consume iodised or non-iodised salt and I believe that choice should also be available to them with folate fortified bread,”

No, for organic breads they still wanted to add folate to our bread but instead of adding it at milling, add it at baking. Right, so organic can still apply to the flour but not to the bread. Nowhere in her press release does it suggest not adding folate, just where it should be added and as per usual we neeeded to medicate the whole population for just 60 pregnancies er annum, right up the Greens alley.

This of course contrasts starkly against Sue Kedgely’s position today.

“There are some concerns in the scientific community that too much folic acid can cause pre cancerous cells and tumours to grow more quickly. Given this new research we need to take a precautionary approach and be certain it is safe before we require almost every loaf of bread to be fortified with folic acid,”

And of course Sue Kedgley has been scare-mongering on Q+A as well.

But she’s saying we have to do it so we’re eating up for Australia, we’re going to be forced because of some trade relationship with Australia, surely we should put – public health issues should be paramount, not some diplomatic relationship.

So what is her position? Is she for it or against it, or for it but in a little while/ Or perhaps for it because it’s good for you and against it on organic?

For the record I am against the poisoning of our bread by the Australians. I am for personal choice. I see nothing wrong with making supplements available to those who ask. I see no valid reason at all in forcing the entire population to be mass medicated for something that is readily avaialbe in almost every supermarket in the country.

And before you point out that salt is iodised…yes well our soils don’t have iodine in it so it made sense to add it to salt. Of course we are now seeing plenty of iodine deficiency related illness appearing after the wallies told us salt was bad for us. I my self buy rock salt and so choose to have no iodine. Fluoride is the same. It is good for almost everyone. Folate is the direct opposite situation as Fluoride.

With friends like these….

The Greens must surely be considering their option regarding New Zealand First, but what about their options with Labour. Constantly shafted and taken advantage of because of their adherence to the more radical communist influences rather than the Green influences of the party.

Labour seems to wantonly attack them at every opportunity despite them being supposed leftist travelling mates. Witness this video of Sonny Thomas, the most hideous gay man on earth and Labour functionary attacking and slurring Green MP Sue Kedgley. He accuses her repeatedly of driving an SUV even after Kedgely denys it and then he accuses her of being a “Marsden Green”. For those who don’t know what that reference means it is because students at Samuel Marsden Collegiate wear green blasers with the inference being these people are green on the outside, tories on the inside. Nice!, attacked by your own mates.

I wonder when the Greens will finally show some integrity and make a stand.



It has taken a long, long time but I’ve done it, I have finally found someone who makes Sue Kedgley look good in parliament.

Thank god our parliamentary questions aren’t like this. Warning: she goes on and on and I’m not sure any of it is in English.


Quote of the Day – Surprise , surprise its a Green

Sue Kedgley: How can he seriously claim that a channel where advertising uses up a quarter of every hour and breaks up its programmes every 6 to 8 minutes, where local content will next year shrink to 36 percent, the same level it was at before the charter was introduced, and where charter programmes that do not maximise ratings are to be scrapped, or scheduled at odd hours, is in any way a success story or meeting charter objectives?