I see those lying scumbags at “GreensWatch” have returned, spreading outrageously defamatory lies and hiding behind a US ISP and the fatuous line that they don’t break electoral law by refusing to disclose who they are because, they bizarrely claim, no-one’s “paid”. (Yes, apparently they’re pitching their site at the moronically credulous who would believe that the commercial US ISP doesn’t require payment to host them.)
Obviously, you can tell the credibility of their allegations by how willing they are to stand behind them. We’re no-one! We’re above the law! We’re beyond the law! We can make up any revoltingly false garbage we like and disappear mysteriously into the night!
Whatever you may think of the Greens, you’d have to concede that the fact that such loathsome, cowardly crooks as the people behind “GreensWatch” hate them so much, and devote so much time and effort to trying to hurt them, and that they’re forced to dissemble and outright lie to do it, is a fairly ringing endorsement. Vote for the Greens – it’s what Australian politics’ dirtiest players fear the most!
The Greens must be doing something right.
UPDATE: Well, downdate really. Looks like I wrote something very similar last time they came up, and looked at the s328 issue then. In fact, that post is what prompted their lame disclaimer.
Turns out you can entirely block something unpleasant from your memory, after all!
what a strange website! If accountability for public funds is so important to them, why no focus on the pork-barrelling Nationals? Or those Qld Libs who were caught misusing their electorate allowances? Fucking hypocrites.
And why focus on you, you aren’t a Greens politician: it makes about as much sense as stalking someone for being a labor voter. Why are rightwingers so predisposed to letting their hatred of others cloud any judgement they might ordinarily possess?
Hell, I’m not even a Greens member at the moment. But that’s not going to stop bullshit artists like those liars or slandy.
Not to mention the call for “accountability” by people so accountable for their actions they won’t tell us who they are.
Why on earth do you bother with this? This site is not going to be taken seriously by anyone. It’s sole purpose is to wind-up Greens supporters, and distract them from political activities.
Oh my fucking god. The article on you was so meaningless. Someone actually bothered to write that and it’s supposedly news?
SB is right, Greenswatch isn’t intended to be a serious contribution to our democracy: the anonymity of its contributor/s, the attacks on you rather than any other Greens voter, the reliance for material on Andrew “gossip is news” Landeryou give the game away.
It’s just another website that contributes sweet FA to the interwebs.
“It’s sole purpose is to wind-up Greens supporters, and distract them from political activities.”
I don’t think it is. I think its sole purpose is to fling mud in the hope that some of it, some vague impression of “kookiness” or something, sticks. It’s also why anonymous anti-Green groups bombard letterboxes at election time with “Bob Brown’s going to inject your son with gay heroin and make him marry a tree” garbage. They throw out so many slurs that, for some people, eventually one may resonate.
Oh, it’s serious alright. Not honest or legitimate – quite unlawful, in fact – but deadly serious.
the authors are anonymous because its one of Andrews multiple personalities
If somebody is defaming you over the internet, isn’t there some sort of legal action you can take to force them to reveal their identities and take them to task for that defamation?
Yes, you can issue proceedings against the host, but it’s expensive – even if you represent yourself – and, for an ordinary individual like you or I, usually not worth it. Particularly if you have to run through the US courts. And if it’s someone like Landeryou, good luck getting any money that a court awards you.
I think the Greens should pursue the AEC angle, though.
I think its sole purpose is to fling mud in the hope that some of it, some vague impression of “kookiness” or something, sticks.
The site seems to be preaching to the converted, ie those who would never vote Greens in a pink fit – this is evident by having you as a focus. The claims are lame and very juvenile, like something the Young Libs or Young Labor would throw together, and unlikely to have the mass appeal needed in order to change perception.
Those who already vote Greens would never take their silly claims seriously, and I don’t think anyone who would be toying with voting Greens would fall for them either – they would already form their views based on broader factors rather than pedantic factoids about abuse of allowances or who is sleeping with whom – these are not vote changing claims. The general public are usually pretty good at seeing through ideologically extreme assertions, as the Lindsay pamphlet scandal showed.
FWIW I think it’s a good idea for the Greens to pursue the AEC angle too. You can bet the 2 major parties would be doing just that if it were them as the focus.
Confessions is absolutely right.
You should entirely ignore the content of the site – nobody will read it other than the fringe right-wing, and even they will recognise that it is unhinged. You waste your own time by devoting even 5 seconds of thought to the idiotic claims contained on that site.
If you want to go after the existence of the site as a vehicle to slander and defame you (and/or the Greens), however, then I say go for it. It’d be nice to see Slandy end up in front of the courts again.
Mondo-I love the hilarious irony in that in their hysterical attempts to paint the Greens as Satan’s henchmen, they would alienate many centrists considering voting Green. They would be 1000 times more effective if they just toned down the smears to ‘plausible.’
“I love the hilarious irony in that in their hysterical attempts to paint the Greens as Satan’s henchmen, they would alienate many centrists considering voting Green. They would be 1000 times more effective if they just toned down the smears to ‘plausible.’”
Which of course is why I gave the site some publicity. I’m inclined to be optimistic and believe that they do their cause more harm than good.
As of 8:45 pm this evening, the GreensWatch site is down.
Let’s hope it’s a permanent situation.
Cheers.
Pursuing the AEC angle is still worth it. The Greens could ask the AEC whether the site constitutes an Associated Entity thereby requiring lodgement of an annual disclosures return. Based on the information I saw on the site it wouldn’t be too hard to mount the case the site benefits the major parties to a “significant extent”.
Did you get screen grabs of the material before they shut it down? Alternatively I recall the site thanking Landeryou for hosting it in their absence – there might be material on his site that could be submitted to the AEC for a ruling. At the very least it might make him think twice about the extent to which “gossip can be news”.
I did indeed take screenshots.
The big parties are indeed scared of the Greens, because, to coin a phrase form the carlton football club, “they know we’re coming” for their senate seats.