National rules out party sources for internal leaks
National leader John Key is continuing to refuse to disclose which consultants his party hires, saying a "vindictive" Labour Government would deny them business. He has also ruled out someone within the party being to blame for leaks and is pointing the finger at the Parliamentary Service. At the weekend, investigative author Nicky Hager reported Mr Key had hired Australian political strategy company Crosby/Textor. The company had courted controversy for tactics including push polling, designed to influence voters. Hager's report included diary-type references and dates and details of Mr Key's meetings. Yesterday, Mr Key raised the issue with the Parliamentary Service. Hager wrote The Hollow Men based on 475 stolen or leaked emails from former leader Don Brash which led to him leaving Parliament. A police investigation found no evidence of hacking and Hager has always maintained the emails were leaked to him by National Party sources.
The new Hollowman doco that is due out just before the election will be VERY interesting to watch, I called Nicky the day after I had finished reading the Hollowman to suggest a doco so that more NZers can see what was in the book in a format that has wider mass appeal than a book, and the doco has been made. As for John’s concerns that it is a Parliamentary Service leak, that wouldn’t be a Neutron bomb would it? I wonder who leaking those Don Brash emails to the media would be a Neutron bomb? Don liked to read his emails at the end of every day, so he would have them printed out every day and he would methodically go through them each day, I wonder where those emails went after Don read them? A neutron bomb is a pretty nasty weapon….
Neutron bomb
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A neutron bomb was a type of tactical nuclear weapon built mainly by the U.S. specifically to release a relatively large portion of its energy as energetic neutron radiation. This contrasts with standard thermo-nuclear weapons, which are designed to capture the intense neutron radiation inside the bomb to increase its overall yield. The technical term for the neutron bomb was "enhanced radiation weapon" (ERW). In terms of explosive yield, ERWs were about one-tenth that of a conventional fission type weapon.[1] While significantly less in explosive power, they were still much more potent than any conventional bomb
So how about them truckies? You know that big issue that EVERYONE is talking about at the moment? They are eve doing a bit of that protesting suff that you love so much Bomber, what's it called again? Ah yes "Direct Action" yeah baby!
ReplyDeleteHow do you like it when when it's directed against your precious lefty government Bomber?
No? cat got your tongue?
Yeah you keep banging on that hollow drum of your like any still cares about it.
...
ReplyDeleteUmmmm, everyone is allowed to protest, I don't have any issue with that anonymous poster with the chip on their shoulder, the problem for truckies is that the majority of their cost increase has nothing to do with Government policy and their fears are legit with oil looking to be $200 by the end of the year, that's why the rail buy back was such a good idea
Ummmmm the reason they are protesting is the 7% increase in RUCs which the Labour govt promised to give them a 30 day heads on, but didn't. Then again, Labours lies don't seem to get much airing when their are hollow boogie men for you to bray about.
ReplyDeleteYeah the rail buy back, real good idea, did you not see the news yesterday, all this is is a shitty act from labour to price truckies out of the market , removing competition for their shitty new train set. What people with no business experience, like yourself, fail to realise is how the use of trucks is FAR more efficient than train ever were or will be. Effciency makes businesses, and the econmy more productive, it is better for us all.
You see Bomber, truck can deliver door to door which is what businesses like - it's quick and more efficient. Trains only deliver from station to station - which means that a supplier has to get their goods to the station, it has to be reloaded on to a train, get to another station, be unloaded, picked up and delivered by a fourth party, and that is the best case scenario. That's a whole lot more paper work, handling and chances for things to go wrong, get lost stolen or damaged. Lets not even start on the sort of unionised shit heads who will be striking at the drop of a hat like they used too.
The rail buy back is a complete cluster fuck and you do yourself no favours by ignoring it, unlike Tim who seems to have a better grasp on the situation.
Bombers a 'big picture' man who has no time for how govt policies effect the ordinary man on the street. It would be interesting to read his retort of the above post but I suspect he has none because all he gives us is rhetoric instead of fact.
ReplyDeleteThis 'doco' Bo ber, who financed it?
ReplyDeletePlease don't tell me NZ on Air.
My tax dollars used for political stunts really pisses me off.
...
ReplyDeleteYou see Bomber, truck can deliver door to door which is what businesses like - it's quick and more efficient. Trains only deliver from station to station - which means that a supplier has to get their goods to the station, it has to be reloaded on to a train, get to another station, be unloaded, picked up and delivered by a fourth party, and that is the best case scenario. That's a whole lot more paper work, handling and chances for things to go wrong, get lost stolen or damaged. Lets not even start on the sort of unionised shit heads who will be striking at the drop of a hat like they used too.
The rail buy back is a complete cluster fuck and you do yourself no favours by ignoring it, unlike Tim who seems to have a better grasp on the situation.
Yawn - yep I've heard the ZB talkback position that rubbishes the rail network, I also read Keith Ngs report that showed that even when you take this farily weak point into account that Rail is still very many more times more effecient than trucks, your arguement doesn't actually stand up.
Bombers a 'big picture' man who has no time for how govt policies effect the ordinary man on the street. It would be interesting to read his retort of the above post but I suspect he has none because all he gives us is rhetoric instead of fact.
Oh sweetheart, that's a bit bitchy isn't it? You need some attention, you wanna hug? You've read my above retort his arguement doesn't stand up to scrutiny, Keith Ng wrote a report in the HOS disproving it, we talked about the article on the Sunday Newspaper Brunch Club, keep up.
So who financed it?
ReplyDeleteBo ber?
Hello?
Is this line broken?
Hello?
Anyone there?, Bo ber you there?
Anyone?
Hellooo...
...o
....o
.....o
......o
.......o
Yawn - yep I've heard the ZB talkback position that rubbishes the rail network, I also read Keith Ngs report that showed that even when you take this farily weak point into account that Rail is still very many more times more effecient than trucks, your arguement doesn't actually stand up.
ReplyDeleteWow, I truly expected better from you Bomber, you actually have no argument at all!
So tell me Bomber - you with no business experience at all, tell me how rail would fix this very real logistical freight issue: A specialised steel fabricator in Henderson gets his steel from his supplier in East Tamaki, are you going to get that delivered by rail? Then the fabricator gets his fittings galvanised in Hamilton – do you really think it would be efficient to send something from Henderson to Hamilton and back by rail smarty pants?
Once back from Hamilton, the Henderson based steel fabricator assembles his goods and wants to send them to Gisborne. "Great" I hear you say "Long haul is what we are talking about!"
Wrong - because by rail the goods would have to go from Auckland to Palmerston North, up to Napier and then on to Gisborne, takes twice as long, way less efficient, more expensive and I truly shudder to think how many sets of thieving useless union fee paying hands the goods are going to have to go through before it gets to the final destination. But for a talking head like Bomber, who knows nothing about running a real life business or effciency or keeping a bunch of people gainfully employed, this is all okay cause his buddy Keith Ng says so. I think I now know why so many deluded middle class kids go to University and get brainwashed into think Marxism is a great idea.
Before you spout forth Bomber, I suggest you get your hands on a map of NZ and have a look at just how many places don't have rail road track running through them, then you might just begin to understand why rail isn't some amazing silver bullet to all of our problems.
You might also want to consider how all the raw products such as milk, wool, livestock and meat, market garden produce, logs, all get from the place they are grown to the places they are processed and then from their into your local shops, this might also help you understand why we could spend billions and billions and billions of dollars on rail and still be no where near as efficient or productive as we are now with trucks.
...
ReplyDeleteNo, you have simply cherry picked your arguement and are getting all foamy and frotyhy about it, Keith Ng clearly points out that rail is much more effecient than trucks, that was the issue here and you've gotten all angry, look, road users use 3.10MJ/t-km (that’s 3.1 million units of energy to move one ton of goods one kilometer) where as rail uses .61MJ/t-km – that is a massive difference even when you include the trucks moving goods off Rail. All you have pointed out is how threadbare our rail tracks are and that we need further investment, which is what the Government are doing.
Yeah Bomber, milk, wool, livestock and meat, market garden produce, logs, wine - these are all cherry picked examples.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that you are clinging to Ng's energy effciency talk rather then the effciency of time and cost which is what really counts for businesses and their customers show you are just sticking you fingers in your ears and ignoring the facts. As tim pointed out a while ago, there is a very good reason why most towns don't have track running through them - the cost of putting them there far out weighs any benefit.
In your desperate attempt to paint this as one of your big business bogie man stories, you also gleefully ignore all of the small businesses and one one contractors who have trucks that are used for the day to day local transport of their goods and equipment who will also be stung by the RUCs. Either ignorance, arrogance or naiveté, you really don't care much about the working class do you Bomber?