June 4th, 2009 at 8:54 am
…….No, Goff raised an allegation with Key about a labour activist………

Activist? Then surely this labour party member must be well known – How do you define activist?

June 3rd, 2009 at 10:00 pm
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/2467307/Goff-raised-earlier-complaint-about-Worth
Seems like Goff has behaved impeccably Mr key ? less so

No, Goff raised an allegation with Key about a labour activist who didn’t want to be named and hadn’t made a formal complaint. This complaint is something different. John Key has done the right thing. Goof has trying to make polictical capital from this and may end up looking like an egg.

Phil “cough-it-up” Goff perhaps

John Key should take heed of the old saying:

Man fool me once – shame on him
Man fool me twice – shame on me

DON’T TRUST PHIL

Does Phil Goff/Labour know more than he is letting on?

Or inadvertantly letting on (as on Checkpoint) and thus the no show on Close Up?

How are these emails being sourced? And how stupid of politicians to be using (Parliamentary??) emails for alleged inappropriate behaviour, you just never know who will get their dirty little mits on them later!

Listen to Radio NZ Checkpoint & Mary Wilson’s interview with (a somewhat hestitant/nervous?) Phil Goff.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/national/ckpt/2009/06/03/labour_says_worth_resignationinevitable

@ 8 seconds into the interview:

Checkpoint: “What do you know of the allegations firstly?”.

Phil Goff: “Well I know very little about the current allegation on which ah his resignation was ah obviously sought by the Prime Minister ah other than what has been slowly drip-fed ah out from the PM and I think ah that’s part of the difficulties for this story ah this morning Mr Key said …….”.

@ 57 sec into the interview:

Phil Goff: “……….and indeed one such allegation ah that I received ah I privately referred to the PM to follow up because I was sufficiently disturbed about what the complainant had said about Dr Worth’s behaviour

THEN Phil Goff goes on to outline an incident from a complainant, referring (some 1 min 50 sec into the I/V) “that some of the emails that went in between Dr Worth and this woman were quite inappropriate”.

At 3′15 Phil Goff: “I’ve had the emails read to me…”.

At 3′26″ Checkpoint: “Ok so you got, you got told about this in May but when had it actually happenned?”.

Phil Goff: “Ah it had happenned ah over a period of time ah from ah really from late last year”.

Checkpoint: “Over several months?”.

Phil Goff: “Yes”.

NOW I don’t know if this has anything to do with the current situation (and apart from Phil Goff feeding the media i.e. Checkpoint, his line) it just seems a little bit interesting that emails were involved and in which Phil Goff was “read” the contents etc (how convenient to put a little distance on this from himself).

HOW did Labour get these emails?

From the woman herself? Will the woman be willing to allow the media to interview her to verify her side of the story?

Or hacked/stolen from the Parliamentary computer system perhaps?

NOW I’m not defending Richard Worth (he’s obviously a drop kick especially if Phil Goff’s allegations are true) but is there another disturbing angle to this?

Been looking in the mirror again diddums?

You’ve said enough Patrick – I was about to have dessert, but now I feel decidedly nauseous ……..

Diddums.

jesus sitting on a tea leaf, I have never seen some-one so desperately try and appear informed or even interesting.

I realise that this is going a bit fast for you but keep up. Clark finds out about field, sits on it for months and defends him. She finds out about DBP and sits on it for months and Winnie was defended for months. And right there was a little scottish idiot screaming innocent until proven guilty. Key gets the facts straight and acts within a week. So here is the thing. My dad always says its a good thing to remain silent and have people think you are stupid, than to open your gob and prove it.

http://keepingstock.blogspot.com/2009/06/this-will-be-interesting.html