Key’s appalling handling of the SIS/Israeli/Christchurch earthquake issue demonstrates beyond a doubt that the man is not a leader’s elbow. That is the polite version.
Not in the public interest? Give me a break! What is more important than our country’s sovereignty, not being an easy touch for identity or passport fraud even by a “friendly” country, and the integrity of our own passport system? That’s in the national interest, John. Perhaps it’s not in the National interest? You tell me.
If there were no issues around the behaviour of the four unfortunate Israelis in the van in Christchurch that day, why did the SIS conduct an investigation? Why did the survivors depart the country so quickly? The other two guys who died were in my view innocent tourists. I got an email from their desperate parents asking for the privately funded SAR team from Israel to be admitted to NZ and Christchurch and I sent that on to Murray McCully. I was surprised that the team wasn’t accredited but more surprised that there wasn’t any explanation. I might be wrong about all that but the Opposition hasn’t been briefed on this, so I’ll stick to my version.
But importantly for NZ, Key has fluffed this from the start. Let’s be fair, Foreign Affairs was never his forte, but why not just say you were going to mount an enquiry, get some advice, and would get back to the media asap? If you are going to wing media standups, as he thinks he can do, expect some questions you can’t answer. Instead, we get that excruciating interview which went on way past its Press Secretary tolerance time (I would have thought – where was his Press Sec?) and well into injury time.
We have been abused by Mossad agents before in 2004. We have a right to be suspicious. Key’s leadership was conspicuous by its absence in this case.
Maryan didn’t imply that he lied.
@insumnatio – imply not infer already!
Not semantics – simply two recollected versions of the same event. I don’t imagine I had your vote in the first place. But if my error was in saying that Tucker had said someone from his office had briefed Phil, and that assertion turned out to be an error, then I apologise. I generally try to get my facts right and I thought the source of that suggestion was reliable because their other detail had been. This drum has been well and truly beaten now. Time to move on.
The story keeps changing on this though Maryan I think the drum will keep beating when we get an admission that he was briefed after all, forgot about it, and was wrong to say Keys was making it up on the hoof. And maybe when you retract pretty much your whole post saying Keys was making it up on the hoof. It’s starting look like foreign affairs isn’t your forte if you’re not getting briefed by your leader on security briefings he’s had Maryan.
Battlehead I think you are a troll. Be careful. Clare
This is no different from your last term in government. This is why you lost the trust of the electorate.
So you have confirmed with Mr Goff that in the course of his regular briefing with Mr Tucker that he WAS briefed about this issue, as stated by the PM. So now that it is a matter of record, this is no longer a “case study in leadership”, it’s now a drum that has been ‘well and truly beaten”.
So, where is the apology?
There is trolling happening on this and other posts. If it continues then you will be banned. If you want to comment fine. But concerted right wing attacks by groups of you using trolling tactics will not be tolerated. Clare
Trolling Ms Curran? Excuse me, but no, this is not trolling. Ms Street made a comment, I have replied to that comment, and quite simply, trying to shift the goalposts by redefining what is a briefing and what is not is somewhat disingenuous. It demeans both yourself, Ms Street, and the Labour Party in general.
The fact of the matter is that Mr Goff WAS briefed on this matter by Mr Trotter, as stated by the Prime Minister. To then try to state that Mr Key is somehow responsible for the content of the briefing, or Mr Goff’s interpretation of the aforementioned briefing is very poor form.
That’s not a nice thing to say clare, I don’t make personal comments about how you look so don’t go making personal comments about me please, you know you’ve lost the argument when you start calling people rude names.
Clare: “But concerted right wing attacks by groups of you using trolling tactics will not be tolerated”
I think those you suspect of being ‘right wing’ are actually voters Labour lost in 2008
@bottlehead…. your hurt feelings make our collective hearts bleed… it is obvious to anyone with an iq at room temperature that you and bart have no more interest in actually debating issues like mature adults.
your behavior here, and on other sites have left no other conclusion possible..
i hate to think of the kind of thrill this sort of ugly, abusive and utterly hypocritical cant is giving you, but i for one am looking forward to your inevitable banning from all but kiwiblog.
Mr BBFloyd. Sadly your response is typical of you and your ilk. Any opinion that differs from yours is invalid. So, here’s a newsflash for you. Since I first was enfranchised at the age of 18, I have voted Labour more often than any other party. My first MP was John Terris, in Western Hutt, and I was always impressed by the integrity of the man. I would love to debate the issues. Your response is to hope I am BANNED? And you say I am unwilling to debate the issues?
Back to the thread. Mr Goff impugned the integrity of a senior civil servant, claiming that he was not briefed on this issue. Once he had checked with Mr Trotter, and found that he HAD actually been briefed, he then tried to backtrack by complaining that the brief was not comprehensive enough, and that it wasn’t what he would call a brief. Maryan Street, on this thread, stated that if this was the case, she would apologise. She has not done so.
And when I think about the integrity I used to respect in long serving and honourable Labour MP’s like John Terris, I want to weep!
The avoidance of debate, the rounding on those who would try to put forward an alternative point of view, the lack of principle shown by Labour in Government and in Opposition, these will NEVER be resolved if the collective response by you and your ilk is to suppress all opposing points of view. This is a democracy, freedom of speech is a cornerstone of who and what we are, and it is anathema to you. This may well be one reason why 71% of New Zealanders cannot bring themselves to vote for a Labour Government!
Last warning before a ban. Trevor
Listen to him, I don’t want you to go.
I think, in light of recent events, and commentary by the Leader of the Opposition, this issue needs to be revisited! Mr Goff has now directly challenged the integrity of a Senior Civil Servant who, by virtue of the nature of his employment, is severly constrained in his ability to respond. These allegations must be addressed.
Personally, I know who I am more disposed to beleiving!
He said that he didn’t see the papers, he never said that the SIS dude was a scum bag or anything!
I don’t recall hearing Goff say anything bad about him. 
Deleted. You are banned. Offensive too many times. Clare