Request Ignored by SIS

There's been a lot written about the possibility that Israeli spies gained false New Zealand passports and whether Phil Goff was briefed on the situation by the head of the SIS, Warren Tucker.

I'm not particularly interested in adding to any fictional spin that is presently pervading the blogosphere and some news outlets... what I am interested in though is if Phil Goff's request for full disclosure will be adhered to?

It's a reasonable request by Phil Goff that he be privy to documents Warren Tucker has said Phil Goff has already seen. Therefore there's no reason to withhold that information from the opposition leader.

Recently I blogged about John Keys lies concerning the investigation into Israeli spies gaining false passports and the happenings after Ofer Mizrahi's death in the Christchurch earthquake. The inconsistencies within John Key's explanation have not been resolved.

Key's excuse for not informing the public about the investigation was that it's "not in the national interest" if Israeli spies are gaining false passports for possible terrorist acts. Wrong! It's very much of national interest if New Zealands sovereignty is being abused, especially after the Israeli's gave assurances that such behaviour would not occur again.

So full disclosure concerning this matter is required and Phil Goff rightly requested this on the 4th from the SIS and John Key:

"Rather than the selective release of information, I call on the SIS and John Key to release all the documentation they have about the investigation into the Israelis and give a full and frank account of what happened to New Zealanders.”

I'm also interested to know why it's John Key who's insisting that Phil Goff was briefed? John Key was not present at any meeting between Phil Goff and Warren Tucker so cannot insist on the specifics of the situation.

If we were to read a little more into the Prime News first broadcast I've embedded below, perhaps we can say that John Key is insisting that Warren Tucker says Phil Goff was briefed, to avoid a controversy concerning the initial lack of disclosure and why such deception was undertaken.



Why would Warren Tucker not brief Phil Goff I hear you ask? Could it be that he knew Phil Goff would want a more robust investigation instead of what was essentially a cover up? Could it be that Warren Tucker thought Phil Goff might inform the public concerning this matter instead of us gaining that information through an SIS agent leaking details to the media?

Perhaps Warren Tucker withheld the information from Phil Goff in the first instance because he believed the Israeli spy issue would never come to light through an SIS leak. That would have been the belief of John Key as well, that the public would never know.

It's unlikely that Phil Goff would simply forget such an important briefing if it was given. He has no reason at all to lie about such a thing. At best it's an oversight by Warren Tucker, at worst it's an underhanded smear campaign by Warren Tucker, Cameron Slater and the Minister of the SIS John Key.

In making the unusual move of releasing cherry picked information to a right wing blogger, and that Warren Tucker knew Cameron Slater would use such information in a vexatious manner, he has breached a principal of the Official Information Act. Warren Tucker has also breached confidentiality and undertaken this specifically to besmirch Phil Goff's credibility.

Somebody with an ulterior motive would be more likely to breach normal procedure and initially try to hide information. I don't have to spell out what the Minister in Charge of the NZ Security Intelligence Service motivation might be to firstly instigate a cover up and then want to discredit the opposition leader do I? In effect John Key has abused his position, but what else is new?