The book gives no indication that Farrar was part of the disgusting rape conversation in the book, even if he ran the parties. And I really don’t think he would have been. He can be faulted for being matey with these guys, but I do not think he would be part of that kind of talk.
DPF has updated his post on making improvements at Kiwiblog:
UPDATE: The home of mainly anonymous bloggers, The Standard, has a go at my decision to have even more transparency than I currently do. And what is hilarious, is the post is anonymous.
Also they print an extract from the book which is totally factually wrong. The party they cite was not organised by me, and I did not even invite anyone to attend. I went to a party in Palmerston North. Around 30 to 40 people attended the party, and they can all attest I was not the organiser. It’s just a smear.
The anonymous author at The Standard has in turn responded to that:
[Update: For the record, I note that Farrar now denies the allegation in Dirty Politics that he organised the "Princess Party", though he did attend. As to why writers sometimes choose to remain anonymous, such as me on this occasion, look no further than the climate of intimidation created by the Nats' attack politics machine. Who needs that kind of filth, I don't.]
And Scotty and Kracklite - I make no apology for holding The Standard to account where I see fit. I think they do more damage than good to their cause - and they've banned me for telling them that. Just as I've held Kiwiblog, Farrar and Slater to account for crap things (in my opinion) they've done. Slater tried to dump on me big time a month ago in his usual vindictive fashion - just after I was banned for posting a different opinion to his on Tania Billingsley and rape issues.
So get stuffed with your petty personal diversions.
Very funny Scotty and Kracklite. The law is actually like this:
The longer an online discussion goes on with me involved, the greater the probability that numpties will try to divert it and make it about me rather than the topic - and blame that diversion on me.
Have either of you got anything to say about the topic? In case you hadn't noticed - "We can do better than this". Can you try?
Graeme Edgeler has pointed out that strike offences are only counted once the warning is given. Key has squirmed out of decisive action on that technicality.
It’s over to you, Pete, to identify a left-leaning blogger with even a tenth of the venality and vindictiveness of WhaleOil.
Why shouldn't I confront any level of venality and vindictiveness? We should be prepared to confront dirt at any level, surely?
Russell's post is titled "We can do better than this." Quibbling about whether it is as extreme as Slater or not and doing nothing if it's not is a part of the problem. 'We' won't do any better than this if we excuse most of the dirtiness for whatever excuse we can think of.
Keir - have you read that thread? Two comments allege much more than what you're claiming.
Dismissing dirt as 'not as dirty as Slater' sets an awfully poor standard - especially alongside another post there today titled Left wing blogs aren’t “the same” - if they want to criticise some else's standards they should try having some of their own.
Because blog comments like that are an insidious part of dirty politics. No one so far has challenged it. And the blog lets them go while being draconian on other far less serious things - that makes the blog as dirty as any.
Maybe the moderators are busy but I've seen plenty of dirt allowed to keep running.
You couldn't get much a much worse accusation or insinuation than that - you would understand if you were on the receiving end.
And it's old too - "That rumour’s been circulating Wellington for a long time, but I can’t substantiate it." Dirty politics.
I think Collins is heading for the exits, but I don’t know if that’s enough now.
Better late than never but there's significant damage been done in the meantime. As far as enough goes, Ede should have already been dealt to publicly as well.
This ‘they all do it’ cop out is getting beyond a joke – there just isn’t an equivalent to Slater on the left.
No there's not an equivalent, but there's plenty of try hards. For instance:
It's good that finally someone from the National Cabinet has spoken up against 'acting that way' - some more takes on it from Twitter:
Bill English visibly uncomfortable today answering questions #dirtypolitics allegations, partic those regarding Judith Collins.
English [on Collins giving Simon Pleasants' name to WO]: “That’s a style of politics, it’s not a style I like and I don’t participate in it”.
Bill English says it is not the sort of politics he engages in.
Bill English does not condone attack politics outlined in Nicky Hager’s book but won’t be drawn on whether Judith Collins should face consequences.
Key has probably judged correctly that outside the political bubble most people don't know and/or don't care, but he may have misjudged how the toxicity could grow.
Media are in a very difficult position on this. Some of what Slater does and some of what he posts is genuinely newsworthy. Journalists can't rule out reporting on or using as a source certain people or certain publications, shows or social media because, for example, someone associated openly admits to enjoying practicing dirty politics.
What I think media has to do is take a more eyes wide open and balanced approach. And not feed the dirt mongering by giving them non-news pulpits.
The thing is that the nature of Slater was well known to anyone who has taken a decent look at what he does over the years. Sure some of the emails give some specific examples new examples.
I haven't been shocked about what has been revealed. I'm shocked that media haven't already noticed and covered many other examples, and that they have given him so much of a megaphone to promote his agendas.