- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Monday, February 04, 2013

Cameron Slater 0 David Fisher 1

Whale angry. Whale smash.

So the war between Cameron Slater and David Fisher just went nuclear. Cameron has been throwing baseless verbal feces at Fisher like a deranged chimp in a concrete zoo for sometime now. The reason for all this verbose animosity is because Slater is Judith Collin's favorite attack dog/pet and Fisher has angered the Government with his very sharp Kim Dotcom journalism.

Sadly starting a war with someone like Fisher is best done with a sledge hammer between the eyes, because if you don't take him out in the first shot, you're screwed.

And so it comes to pass.

Slater is one of the best propagandists in the game who constantly twists issues to add some level of self-rightous moralizing in on top of his outrage. This time Slater is attacking the HoS because he claims their addition to a paragraph about Paul Holme's drinking issues in their editorial made them hypocrites because the editor had suggested to Slater he leaves the personal stuff out now he is an editor.

Gloriously David Fisher tweeted an old 2009 post by Slater where he bewilderingly claims Holmes was trying to buy drugs?!?!?!?! That he gets caught out hypocritically attacking others for a hypocrisy he himself gleefully partook in is pure joy.

So when Slater was alleging Holmes was buying drugs, that was fine. But when the HoS mentioned one paragraph about Paul's personal problems with booze and relationships that's the worst kind of hypocrisy???

How does he get away with this?

Hoisted by his own harpoon again.



At 4/2/13 8:41 am, Blogger Sanctuary said...

I would have thought Slater's motivations are pretty straightforward. Farrar and whoever is National's obedient pet at "Keeping Stock" have been frantically spruiking Truth stories recently. Now Slater is looking to drag the Herald into a personalised slanging match. It seems obvious to me that Cameron Slater has done absolutely nothing to lift the circulation of Truth, and he is resorting to smearing journalists at rival papers to generate a "controversy" to get people to buy his rag for the latest installment of "he said, she said".

At 4/2/13 11:00 am, Blogger blondewithaniq said...

There once was a blogger on boil
He spouted his 'truths' on Whaleoil
But he thrashed them in vain
When was harpooned again..
Me-thinks blubber is best in
Tin foil..

Love David Fisher..
Apt surname too..

At 4/2/13 12:03 pm, Blogger Barnsley Bill said...

You might like to ask Slater where he got the 2009 Holmes tip from?

At 4/2/13 12:05 pm, Blogger Barnsley Bill said...

You might like to ask Slater which Herald staff member leaked the 2009 Holmes piece to him.

At 5/2/13 11:33 am, Blogger Frank said...

Bill - you can ask, but I doubt if Slater has the balls to answer.

His tactic is to evade giving any straight, honest answer and instead use smear tactics against anyone who pisses him off.

It may work for a time, but y'know, after a while it ceases to have the desired effect and people strike back.

Case in point: http://fmacskasy.wordpress.com/2013/02/03/whaleoil-goes-porno/

And this is the guy that "Truth's" Board appointed as their new editor? They must be desperate.

At 5/2/13 2:15 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can remember some years ago watching Holmes in Yemen on the TVNZ series Intrepid Journeys. At one point in the programme he was chewing away on some khat due in part to many Yemenis he witnessed doing so on their breaks.

Considering khat is a drug with amphetamine like effects and an illegal class C drug in New Zealand. I though it foolish of Holmes to chew it before the camera, as there was the prominent case of his daughter’s court case for methamphetamine possession and publicised addiction to it.

Since Holmes was involved in campaigning against “P”, don’t you think consuming a drug with similar effects that is illegal in this country before the cameras could potentially tarnish one’s reputation?


Post a Comment

<< Home