Hard News: Dirty Politics
2403 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 55 56 57 58 59 … 97 Newer→ Last
-
John Key has decided to front foot it after all
PM responds to incorrect surveillance claims
Prime Minister John Key tonight corrected misinformation that has been put in the public domain concerning the operations of the Government Communications Security Bureau.
“Claims have been made tonight that are simply wrong and that is because they are based on incomplete information,” Mr Key says.
“There is not, and never has been, a cable access surveillance programme operating in New Zealand.
“There is not, and never has been, mass surveillance of New Zealanders undertaken by the GCSB.
“Regarding XKEYSCORE, we don’t discuss the specific programmes the GCSB may, or may not use, but the GCSB does not collect mass metadata on New Zealanders, therefore it is clearly not contributing such data to anything or anyone,” Mr Key says.
See also Stuff article that, oddly enough, has no links…
-
but the GCSB does not collect mass metadata on New Zealanders, therefore it is clearly not contributing such data to anything or anyone
That line is so glorious, it should be preserved and taught in logic classes.
Start with conclusion: it doesn't happen. Therefore, the evidence that it does happen, is false. The conclusion is fixed, ergo, the rest must fit.
-
Show has started.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
That line is so glorious, it should be preserved and taught in logic classes.
Start with conclusion: it doesn’t happen. Therefore, the evidence that it does happen, is false. The conclusion is fixed, ergo, the rest must fit.
Yup, and, as Juha Saarinen has mentioned, these papers have nothing to do with Greenwald's and Snowden's allegations.
-
-
Just saw Russell ;-)
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Seen him 4 times so far. Drinking on each one. Hic.
-
Snowden providing a more lucid, coherent, and credible explanation of basic civics than a thousand NZ Herald columns.
Thank goodness these Americans have "politicized" our election. Somebody had to, and it's not our homegrown selfie-chasers masquerading as reporters.
-
Not seeing KDC's moment of truth yet. If it was the email, it is pretty weak sauce.
-
First response: Greenwald - good, Snowden - brilliant, Assange - distracted but serious, Armstrong - weakest link, though what he had to say was important. If he could have refrained from the lawyerly cheap shots, he'd have been better. But Dotcom - MIA.
-
I guess it was an advertising slogan. Which doesn’t detract from just how interesting that event was. I can’t imagine watching any party political broadcast of that length, ever. And the Snowden revelation that the NSA have a base in Auckland is a brrrr moment for me.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
But Dotcom – MIA.
Best live tweet during his bit:
<and now for a message from our sponsors>
-
Tom Semmens, in reply to
Snowden providing a more lucid, coherent, and credible explanation of basic civics than a thousand NZ Herald columns.
Thank goodness these Americans have “politicized” our election. Somebody had to, and it’s not our homegrown selfie-chasers masquerading as reporters.
Brilliant summation of my frustration with the NZ media. I think I will steal it.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
It’s not a fucking TV game show, Lemming.
Yes, twitter did seem unduly obsessed by what rock stars Greenwald and Snowden were, and then the lull during Assange's long and not at all charismatic part was full of calls that they'd rather be watching something else, to the point that I wished they were too. By the time it was to Armstrong there was almost a slow clap going "moment-of-truth, moment-of-truth". Russell's observation of the Meth Election kept coming to my mind during. Junkies baying for their redose. There was plenty in what was a movie length show to keep me watching, that's for sure.
-
Has there been anything more on the Warner's email that looks ...a bit fake? If you can steal/hack/obtain one, you'd think you'd usually get 100s so if there was any whiff of authenticity, there'd be masses of context and backup.
-
Assange seemed a bit ghostly. And I mostly wished he wasn't part of it. But his point about a joined up surveillance - trade - law - hegemony was well made.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
you’d think you’d usually get 100s so if there was any whiff of authenticity, there’d be masses of context and backup.
I do think that if I had heaps, I'd drip them out, though, to elicit more lies, and to keep the interest up, just as Rawshark did.
-
“There is not, and never has been, a cable access surveillance program operating in New Zealand, because it operates in Hawaii. Our local access stuff are not "cable access", they automate off local hardware, send it to Hawaii, where it gets grabbed up by the cable access program.
“There is not, and never has been, mass surveillance of New Zealanders undertaken by the GCSB, because technically the NSA do it for them, while sitting in GCSB offices, in New Zealand. They change badges when doing the NSA stuff, so it's totally legit.
“Regarding XKEYSCORE, that's true and the GCSB use it to spy on New Zealanders for me, OKAY? But the GCSB does not collect mass metadata on New Zealanders because, again, they're people and machines are doing it automatically. Totally hands off until you search through it. Therefore it is clearly not contributing such data to anything or anyone, I mean, there's scads of it, it's obviously all automated, and not ours anyway, technically.
Just like those GIANT SPY SATELLITE DISHES that we also don't do anything with at all and aren't spying on anyone with, OKAY?
That law, where they get to tell everyone what hardware we have to use in our internet backbone and stuff, that's what I'm trying to tell you. It's not the GCSB, they just tell everyone to install the NSA's custom hardware and never even touch the stuff. Other than to read it for me. The Prime Minister. To destroy my political opponents with. OKAY?
-
simon g, in reply to
It's not a fucking TV game show, Lemming.
No, but it is a political event, and opponents are always going to look for the weakest link. Snowden/Greenwald provided the focus - others (especially Kim Dotcom) provided the distraction, the chance for Key and co to dodge the focus.
Again, it's the framing: Key v KDC is what he wants, when it should be the PM versus the law and the truth.
-
mark taslov, in reply to
if there was any whiff of authenticity, there’d be masses of context and backup.
Litigation pending, they may be better suited to a court of law than that of public opinion. If they’re authentic, John Key has been given his chance to respond and done so quite unreservedly. As simon g said on the previous page in response to Andrea Vance’s article:
Only Kim Dotcom’s ego can fuck this up. Could he please STFU for a few days and let the rest of us hold the Prime Minister to account?
-
Rob Stowell, in reply to
it’s the framing: Key v KDC
Toni St on 7# said more-or-less verbatim: "It's all so complicated and hard to understand. But in the end it's really simple- who do you trust- our Prime Minister or Kim Dotcom?"
#momentofrevulsion
Brainless or clever framing for their viewers or what? -
BenWilson, in reply to
Brainless or clever framing for their viewers or what?
Is there any difference?
-
Dismal Soyanz, in reply to
Is there any difference?
That goes to the question of intent, m'lud
-
Who was it that smacked down Briscoe's claim that Southern Cross could not have been tapped?
-
Rob Stowell, in reply to
Snowden. He said every other cable NSA had picked in every other country had been tapped, and it would be remarkable if ours somehow 'couldn't be'.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.