I'm referring to revelations from Dirty Politics. Still haven't finished it but could give some snippets tonight if you're interested (and no one else has jumped in).
I mean the guy is a pathological liar. He is as likely to be pulling your tit as giving you something real, going on form.
Do you actually believe the veracity of anything sent to you by Slater? He punked Bomber with this kind of manipulation, and I expect he would love to punk you too.
My angle when making such a statement is this:
Wow, so he had the gall to write yesterday's article even after clearly reading (and quoting) Hager's caveat I gave above? What a knob.
It does seem there's a reasonable chance the whole thing was Slater's sick fantasy. The only actual evidence we have is Slater's word (via the hacked mails) against Hide's. Which makes Hagar a strange target for Hide's ire, until you remember that he's totally and unrepentantly partisan, so saying a harsh word against Slater, even when Slater was fairly clearly plotting and relishing his downfall (I'm reading the book right now), is off the table in favour of the more important concern of calling Hager a fantasist without reference to any single fact that Hager has claimed.
But that would be because Hager quite clearly says this (in Chapter 6):
"There were of course various political pressures on Hide as he made the decision but the threats described here were something completely different. The documents do not contain the texts and we do not know that they exist. There is also no evidence that a direct threat was made to Hide. Nonetheless, Slater and Lusk’s planning and the thinly veiled threat on the blog post go far beyond normal politics. They feel more like blackmail."
So when Rodney said in the Herald "Hager alleges Slater blackmailed me to resign the Act Party leadership. It's not true.", this is in fact not true. It's not true that Hager says he was blackmailed. What Hager says is that they were plotting to blackmail him, and that much is starkly clear. But I'm not surprised that Hide wouldn't want to read it, it's some rancid shit from someone he might once have thought of as a friend. So instead he brain-farts in Hager's general direction, and completely misses.
Well, given the crazy tone of your message I thought you were actually taking the piss out of the viewpoint you expressed. And I'm still not sure because:
Drone strikes, targeted bombings and surgical strikes by our SAS are needed. IS need to be given the message that if they try any of that terror nonsense in Aotearoa, Kiwi response will be swift and decisive.
makes me wonder what kind of military you think we have. It sure isn't capable of any of that. You're living in a dream world. A strange, detached, violent and foolish one.
National has a mandate to do whatever protects our national security.
Their "mandate" is irrelevant. As a government it is simply their job to protect national security, amongst a hell of lot of other things. And the question is about what does that best. It's not "what John Key thinks" automagically, just because he got elected. It's still something up for discussion and I hold strongly that getting involved in this conflict is far more likely to provoke terror attacks than anything our pitiful armed forces can do is likely to prevent them. This is clearly evidenced by the fact that the armed forces of the USA, which compared to ours are like comparing an elephant and a mouse, have done absolutely nothing to prevent the work of IS. In fact, they pretty much caused it. There were no significant terrorist forces at large in Iraq prior to their involvement.
you just keep rubbishing one of the most popular PM’s in NZ history.
Yes, having an opinion that is not of the majority is still allowed in this country for now.
It's the effect on the passengers that's the main problem. Bananas on board are an ill omen, 'tis said.
Mind you, I do have to wonder if it isn't just an excellent smoke screen, a way of diverting attention away from a government with a lot to hide, and it could just blow over, and we never send any troops, having fought hard to make sure that it doesn't happen, and meanwhile the embarrassing revelations of the year slowly slip down the memory hole.
what’s the mechanism that interferes with fishing?
Having a rotten banana in your lunchbox.
It was pretty obvious you meant that. First day that is actually practical, so yes, not in the middle of the maiden speeches. Then the first openly public official moves will be made, although of course it's highly likely that moves have already begun. How likely is it that Key came up with this on his own, rather than as a result of endless US diplomatic pressure? How likely is it that this wasn't even something planned well before the election? I guess we'll have to wait for the next investigative journalist to shed light on that.