Auckland building owner threatened over billboard
September 26th, 2007 at 6:15 am by David FarrarWhale Oil has a disturbing story about how allegedly a building owner who had an anti City Vision billboard on their site was threatened by a City Council Officer to remove the billboard, or their funding will be curtailed.
It is worth noting that the building owner was not the organisation that commissioned the billboard. They just have the space available for commercial hire.
Related posts:
- The billboard probe
- Fighting the billboard ban
- Slaying the Billboard Ban
- Just $70 will keep a billboard alive for another day
September 26th, 2007 at 6:43 am
The shape of things to come….. This is why we need an organisation with National’s expertise to challenge this kind of petty buerocratic sniping at freedom of expression. Politically motivated bullying? Surely not!
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 6:51 am
Yes -a worry.
I sometimes think that there should a personal liability system where anyone who weilds beurocratic power (ie: power by reason of a law) should face personal liability for any misuse of that power.
Somelike the person concerned faces a fine of a weeks wages for doing things like this – and the one I like is anyone who says “I cant tell you that because of the privacy act”.
BUT – not only should they get a weeks fine – their boss gets 2 weeks.
I think that would stop this sort of crap real quick.
Oh – and who would run the system?
Why, me obviously………..
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 7:49 am
“Well I received these photos anonymously, but from a mail server at Auckland City Council.”
Note to any whistleblowers, for gawds sake don’t send anything to whale oil.
How to stick someone in the cr*p, nice work Whaley.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 8:05 am
Actually Sonic, that’ll be a wild goose chase for the gestapo at the Council. Some details are slightly changed to protect the innocent.
Of course in typical socialist fashion you don’t comment on the issues and attempt to thread jack. So would everyone else please refrain from listening to Frank the Scotsman’s thread-jacking attempts.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 8:09 am
I see the council are also cracking down on Steve Crow’s signs this morning as well.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10465959
If it’s true that political interference is being brought to bear on signs, then it deserves an inquiry.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 8:12 am
join the dots people – this is how the EFA will work. Not so much the iron fist in the velvet glove of central, but more like death by a thousand cuts at local level.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 8:22 am
Sonic .. ‘inspired posting’!!!!! Bugger the substance. Ignor the threat to free speech. Threadjack.
All entirely predictable of course from the rabid Left .. bereft as they are of ideas, morals and scruples.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 8:35 am
sonic – such a champion of the ‘whistleblowers’. Think I’m going to throw up.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 8:41 am
“Actually Sonic, that’ll be a wild goose chase for the gestapo at the Council.”
Well if you had not told everyone and their brother the source their would be no problem would there.
Now all they need to do is a quick search of the server logs.
What an idiot.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 8:43 am
wanker
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 8:44 am
sonic, Frank off will yah..
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 8:48 am
breathtaking, we have been regaled with his defence of the EFB for the last month, which would legitimate this kind of political interference in our free speech, then he comes out as a self-appointed champion of the whistleblower who has exposed political interference in free speech..
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 8:49 am
As I said if you have a secret you want to let people know about, but are worried about your boss finding out, do not in any circimstances send it to our chum Whale Oil.
He’d probably print your name, address, telephone number and vital statistics.
At least take the information down now Whale Oil now it’s been pointed out to you.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 9:01 am
Mr Oil, I believe sonic has issued his instructions to you (just as the Council have issued theirs to the building owner) best you do as you are told. God the left like regulating others.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 9:12 am
Sonic are you basically agreeing with Whale Oil that they lefties will do in anyone who stands in thier way.
It sure seems like it from what you have posted.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 9:14 am
Anyway, can we get off the subject of sonic, and raise the topic of political interference in free expression. WE know that central Auckland tried to ban billboards earlier this year (some say because they were threatened by Nationals billboard campaign) reading between the lines, is this just a covert way to achieve the same end – ie pretend to listento public opinion, but do it (ie intimidate and silence opposition) on the QT?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 9:40 am
Mark, I am limiting my comments to pointing out that Mr Oil has disclosed details that will make it easy for the council to indentify who leaked the information to him.
A totally stupid thing to do.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 9:52 am
Actually Sonic, dear fool, I have disclosed details that will make it HARDER for the council to identify who leaked the iformation to me.
Now kindly debate the issue that the left wing in Auckland is attempting to muzzle free speech by blackmailing a group by saying they will lose their funding if the billboard isn’t taken down.
Silence on that will be taken as tacit approval of such actions.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 10:00 am
So you lied when you said it came from an Auckland Council mail server then?
How can anyone believe a single word you say Whale Oil?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 10:15 am
Whale Oil, ever get the feeling that you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t?
Vote:Sonic, surely your last post is in jest?
G
September 26th, 2007 at 10:19 am
Grant, a real journalist would have used the term “sources” or something similar. Whale oil says “I got a mail from Auckland council’s server” then when challenged implied he made that up?
As I said, how can anyone take the man seriously after that?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 10:19 am
Perhaps sonic is upset that his/her plan to get the billboards removed has been exposed.
Oh dear, that’s right it’s not about the billboards – it’s suddenly about whaleoil.
Come on sonic – ball is a small thing carried/passed/kicked by the man. man is bigger thing carrying/kicking/passing the ball.
Look carefully – there is a difference.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 10:28 am
I have never seen Whale Oil identify himself as a journalist.
Vote:In your earlier posts you were concerned that WH had not done enough to protect the whistle blower, and now you’re giving him grief for having posted misleading facts with just that aim in mind.
What exactly is your point?
G
September 26th, 2007 at 10:31 am
His point is it is easy to deflect people with irrellevancies than discuss an issue which exposes the hypocracy that is endemic in NZ politics at the moment. Ironically abusing his right to free speech as a means of diverting attention from those who seek to reduce it. WHy are you wasting you time on this b****t, rather talk about the topic.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 10:36 am
Not wasting time Lee. Too busy for that.
Vote:Sonics threadjacking is directly related to the topic, ie the left’s attempt to disrupt free speech in this country, and I will hold him and his opinions up for the ridicule they deserve every chance I get.
G
September 26th, 2007 at 10:44 am
“Perhaps sonic is upset that his/her plan to get the billboards removed has been exposed.”
Wear that tinfoil hat with pride Burt.
As for the idea that it is somehow wrong to discuss the source of a story when evaluating it’s truthfullness, well it’s a new one to me.
Judging by this, and other past incidents, the truth and Mr Oil have only a passing aquaintance.
You just cannot believe a single word he says.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 10:45 am
Take heart Sonic the Dorkland council will have it’s goons come around and kick Whale oil’s door in. They will have ways of making him talk, a large rate increase should do the trick or prehaps cutting his water off.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 10:50 am
So, what do yo think about the recent trend?
EFB designed to regulate free speech during election year?
Hagar’s assertion that 12 months might not be long enough, why not regulate speech for the full term of Parliament?
Attempts to ban billboards in central Auckland this year?
Use of petty buerocrats to intimidate innocent thrid parties after such gambit failed?
Discriminatory remarks issued in Parliament about religious groups?
ridicule isn’t enough, this new orthodoxy should be challenged at every turn, and not reduced to some thread-jackers object of amusement.
Especially one who is hung like a pistachio.
Is limiting the political expression of oue citizens the new orthodoxy?
There does seem to be an alarming tendency in New Zealand’s powers that be to seek ways to stamp down on freedom of expression.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 11:00 am
Lee, while I dont post on here very often, you will find that when I do the comments I make are almost always in the same vein as yours. I am deeply concerned at the direction my country is heading and have said so when I can.
Vote:I certainly don’t feel like sonic’s object of amusement though, rather he is an object of mine.
Cheers
G
September 26th, 2007 at 11:06 am
Oh F**k it, why don’t we just have a ‘sonic’ page then we can talk about him and his opinions all day, 24/7.
I’m going out to torch some bookshops.
Have a nice day.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 11:06 am
Sonic approves of political blackmail and constriction of free speech.
Not once has he decried the appalling behaviour exhibited by councillor/s in attempting to have someone’s democratic right to say what they damn well please about someone silenced through blackmail to another completely unrelated organisation.
You should hide your head in shame Sonic.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 11:11 am
“Not once has he decried the appalling behaviour exhibited by councillor/s”
I’d be happy to discuss it if I had a reliable source that it happened.
Sadly, the only source we have at the moment has already confessed that he just makes stuff up as he goes along
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 11:18 am
How about you phone the MD of Oggi like I did and confirm it as well, Dick head. The details of which are in my posting which you conveniently have decided to also ignore. I even used his name which would suggest that I have actually spoken to him to confirm the story.
When you first posted you didn’t know that I had disguised some details to protect the innocent, and in very post since you have refused to decry the actions to silence free speech as well as the blatant attempt at blackmail to an unrelated party in an attempt to silence the customer who paid good money to have his say.
You continue to obfuscate and weasel around the issues. You are a sorry sack of excrement.
Discuss you tacit approval of these action or STFU.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 11:19 am
Oh and another thing
“appalling behaviour exhibited by councillor/s”
Have you evidence that an elected councillor is involved in this dispute?
Or did you just invent that as well?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 11:20 am
“Discuss you tacit approval of these action or STFU”
Dammit I missed the vote where Whaleoil was elected king of the blog.
You put the story up, now you whine when you are asked to defend it?
Grow up little boy.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 11:24 am
Sorry last comment was OTT, withdrawn.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 11:30 am
Yes I do have the evidence, otherwise I wouldn’t have posted on it because it wouldn’t have been a story. God, sometimes you really do a good impression of a silly person.
Now back to your approval of blackmail, political interference and suppression of free speech, I am still waiting for your reasoning as to why this may be tolerated or appaluded as something our democracy should be happy with.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 11:32 am
I’m still awaiting the evidence that a councillor was involved.
Or should I just take your word for it?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 11:37 am
Given the vindictive nature shown thus far by a certain councilor it would be best to keep all of my powder dry and drip feed the evidence as the lies from the left pile up.
Meanwhile Sonic still approves of blackmail, political interference and suppression of free speech through his silence.
If indeed I have made shit up as you continually seem to imply then I should, sometime today, see a process server. That however is exceedingly unlikely due to the fact that unfortunately for the councilor involved this is all too real.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 11:45 am
If they do not sue it must be true?
Anyway looks like your clockwork blog is down again.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
Oh and out of interest Whale-Oil. I asume you would defend the right of an organisation that received council funding to display billboards attacking John Banks?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Why sonic, what do you know?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:21 pm
Yes I would defend an organisation doing exactly that that is what free speech is all about, you either believe in it or you don’t. You can’t have free speech sometimes, it is either all the time or it isn’t free speech.
You clearly are of the opinion that free speech is not that vital to a free and democratic society.
You are clearly of the opinion that free speech can be trampled on if it suits your political purpose.
You and your beliefs are one of the reasons why I hate socialists like I hate cancer.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
Right now you both appear to have that out of your systems:
So, what do yo think about the recent trend?
EFB designed to regulate free speech during election year?
Hagar’s assertion that 12 months might not be long enough, why not regulate speech for the full term of Parliament?
Attempts to ban billboards in central Auckland this year?
Use of petty buerocrats to intimidate innocent thrid parties after such gambit failed?
Discriminatory remarks issued in Parliament about religious groups?
Is limiting the political expression of our citizens the new orthodoxy?
There does seem to be an alarming tendency in New Zealand’s powers that be to seek ways to stamp down on freedom of expression.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:34 pm
“free speech is all about, you either believe in it or you don’t”
So why do you delete comments you don’t like from your joke of a blog?
Do as I say not as I do part two?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
Here is another post where whaleoil shows his noble appreciation of everyone’s right to say whatever they want.
http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/?q=node/4895
“Here’s an idea, take you commie propaganda elsewhere where it might be appreciated, you know, like Cuba”
Agree with him or get out of the country.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:38 pm
“free speech is all about, you either believe in it or you don’t”
So why do you delete comments you don’t like from your joke of a blog?
Do as I say not as I do part two?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:39 pm
I do not delete comment from my blog except for swearing.
Do try and keep up Lee.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:40 pm
What is your philosophy about free speech, sonic?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
I agree with the widest possible interpretation of it Lee, although I would exclude incitement to commit certain serious crimes (murder, rape etc) and the old “shouting fire in a crowded theatre” scenario.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Does that include anti-poverty pamphlets by the Catholic Church in an election year?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:49 pm
I would say so,
(I wonder where this is going, that lee is so tricky it could be anything..0
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:51 pm
How about proposals by one of the EFB’s supporters to extend the term of regulated politacal expression to the full parliamentary term at the recent Select Committee?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:52 pm
Do you agree that if I want to take part in a political demonstration, I need to have my name and address printed on the placard?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:54 pm
Sonic, I have never deleted any comments from my blog ever except in the following circumstances.
1. They were defamatory
I do not moderate my comments and people can comment however they want. They of course should then be prepared for me to say whatever i want as well.
My post on the communist was pointing out that he can say and do as he pleases here but if tried that in Cuba he might find out that communists don’t take too kindly to free speech when that free speech goes against the party thought processes.
As for your comment about free speech.
“I agree with the widest possible interpretation of it Lee, although I would exclude incitement to commit certain serious crimes (murder, rape etc) and the old “shouting fire in a crowded theatre” scenario.”
You forgot your current exclusion of right wing business owners expressing an opinion against a councilor who tried to ruin his business. They shouldn’t have free speech should they. Oh and organisations in receipt of council sponsorship, they shouldn’t have free speech either. Oh and the Exclusive Brethren, they can’t have free speech either eh? Have I missed anyone or is your free speech exclusion list longer than that.
yes or no Sonic…..simple concept that you seem to have difficulty understanding….yes or no do you support the actions of attempting to blackmail, threaten, interfere with the democratic right of someone to have a say against a councilor in what ever format (in this instance a billboard) they see fit. Yes or no. No weasel words, no Yes, but, no yes, if they…..Yes or No.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:54 pm
What about making anonymous political donations illegal so that people can’t hide behind anonymity in order to influence Government policy?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:55 pm
Do you think that the EB’s pamphlet during the last election contravened any of your basic philosophy:
I agree with the widest possible interpretation of it Lee, although I would exclude incitement to commit certain serious crimes (murder, rape etc) and the old “shouting fire in a crowded theatre” scenario.
?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:56 pm
“shouting fire in a crowded theatre”
This is not any kind of instance of free speech, or freedom of political expression, which is the real issue. Liberals always raise it, but its just the usual disconnected spaced out off topic crap. Nobody wants to shout fire in a crowded theatre (unless there really is a fire), they just want to be able to express political views, and in particular, political views that may not find favour with the majority or the ruling party.
Being a supporter of the EFB Sonic, whilst simultaneously saying you support the “widest possible interpretation” [commie speak anyway] you’re either mistaken about your sentiments or lying. Which is it?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
Is it not hypocritical to hold politically partisan views that directly contradict your stated philosophy?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 12:58 pm
I say this not to be abusive or rude, (I hope) but because I do think there is a scintillae of common sense working in that rather dour cranium of yours, and hope to be able to point out where you are going wrong.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
Oh, sorry scratch the question about anonymous political donantions, evidently that one is ok in a democratic society, after all they failed to cover that in the EFB…
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 1:03 pm
And I am positive you’d give that one the ‘thumbs up’, wouldn’t you, sonic?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
In the words of Rik Mayall in ‘The Young Ones’
‘Had enough, Nazi, or do you want some more?’
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
sonic’s gone to lunch. I hope he’s self-employed. I’d hate to be the sucker who is paying his wages to mess us all around on here for half the day!
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 1:53 pm
Lee you post here about x10 as much as me mate.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
Yes or no sonic.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
and each one is 10 x the sense you make, commie.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
I would not support actions like that, it’s jus,t as the source is you Whale Oil, I’d need some evidence that it actually happened,
After all, you are not exactly an unpartisan source (to put it mildly)
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
Juts to expand on Mr Oil’s odd relationship to the truth
On his blog, he makes this comment about the story about Bill English and his son’s comments.
“That is where GayNZ should have left it when they were given this “dirt” by some leftist Labour lickspittle”
Now that is speculation masquerading as fact. I wonder how much of this story is as well?
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
sonic
Playing the man and not the ball as you have shown us…
What are GayNZ doing getting all flustered about the comments made by a 14 year old boy. I thought GayNZ would have wanted to distance themselves as much as possible from the past associations between homosexual men and young boys….
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
Thank you Sonic, oh there is much so much more to come on this as well.
The Chief Executive has now had to get involved because of staff complaints of interference by councilor/s.
This’ll get messy
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 2:34 pm
No speculation at all. The information WAS passed to GayNZ, says so in their article. The preferred party of the “Rainbow” Community is Labour. The information is designed to get at Bill English. So calling the informer a “leftist Labour lickspittle” is actually very accurate.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 2:36 pm
Indeed not only speculation but wild speculation.
Information came from a guy who is against homophobia+everyone who is against homophobia votes Labout=must be a plot
Thanks for proving my point about you being to investigative journalism what horse flu is to the Aussie racing industry!
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
Why are you talking about the gays?
Vote:Have they had a billboard removed?
What kind if a sick SOB would do such a thing?
September 26th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
All you need so is threaten the council staff or a councillor with committing a misfeaseance in public office and they will skulk away ( thats if they understand the charge). Works a charm.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 5:26 pm
Back to the billboard. I’d like to know the Council’s side of what happened. Is this likely to happen?
Before everyone gets too uppity about billboards and censorship and elections, there are a number of laws that regulate where and when political billboards can be placed. Certainly any promoting a candidate are not supposed to be placed on public property and should be X distance from the road edge.
Vote:September 26th, 2007 at 6:29 pm
Sonic, you transverse into difficult territory when talking about free speech on private property which is what blogs are, and is also what occurs with billboards on private property during an election campaign. Free Speech on public property, ie billboards during an election, is a little easier to explain.
I might post on it on No Minister. Then again, I might not
Vote: