Hard News: Let's be hearing it
142 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
Just incidentally, sorry if this constitutes feeding, but I note Insolent Prick's speculation (assertion? prediction? - I'm guessing he ain't read it) about the nature and genisis of the book appears identical to the comment he left on kiwiblog.
I'm sure that's a symptom of something.
That said, the lack of impact the comment made there is an interesting starting point in comparing the two forums.
-
I'd like to know why IP (and ilk) are so hurt by it all...
This is very much in the nature of politics and the public sphere...
-
IP:
Hager's work is a beat-up by a fringe socialist who is desperately afraid of Don Brash's leadership taking National to victory next election.
Impressive that you've managed to review the book, when I presume you have yet to get your hands on a copy!
I haven't read Seeds of Distrust, which pretty much got beat up as soon as it came out, but Nicky's first two books have pretty much stood up to the light of day. He's an international expert on electronic evesdropping, and has been recognised as such. His book on Timberlands exposed some pretty horrendous activity by a SOE. I've heard him talk about his methods of research, and his work is generally pretty comprehensive, and he's intelligent and asks good questions.
Maybe you've met him yourself, and had some in-depth political discussions with him, and are therefore entitled to label him a 'fringe socialist'. Personally, from the knowledge that I have of him he's a long way from the socialist fringe. Some people on the left in NZ would regard him as a bit of a cop-out.
Perhaps it'd be better to read what he has to say this time around before dismissing it as left-wing ravings. You'll just look silly if this book leads to Don Brash falling on his sword.
-
"I'm sure that's a symptom of something."
Recycling. Very green of him.
"That said, the lack of impact the comment made there is an interesting starting point in comparing the two forums."
The other being that I haven't called anyone a peabrain on this one.
-
Nicky Hager claimed that the years of taunts that Rod Donald endured for being a frigging nut-job "took their toll", suggesting a contribution to his death.
Hager is a loon. I'm not concerned if he wants to come up with yet more stupid conspiracies. It is the Labour Party, through their sudden desire to paint him as a respectable investigative journalist, who have credibility issues here.
-
Russell wrote:
And then Plunket helpfully suggested to Brash that Hager "couldn't be bothered" having his entire book re-edited, re-paginated and re-printed to satisfy an injunction that shouldn't apply anyway. It was a ridiculous comment. I have a small book publishing business, and I'm well aware that the bulk of the cost is in precisely those activities.Well, call me a pussy, but I don't like seeing any books pulped on legal advice whether it comes from a 'small' house or an arm of a big arse multinational but it's not unknown.[I still feel a sympatheitc thrill at Shakespeare's line, "First, we kill all the lawyers." ;) ] Still, I don't recall Hagar saying that it would have sent Craig Potton to the poor house, but that it would have required a near-total rewrite and months of work he didn't want to do. And too bloody right, say I. But I think you're missing my point, somewhat Russell. The comment may or may not be 'ridiculous', and whether Brash's injunction should have been granted in the first place is wide open to debate. I'm certainly not going to argue with anyone that Sean Plunket is still a cock, despite calming down a lot since his suspension last year, but that's not the point.
This is: Do you think Plunkett unfairly or inaccurately paraphrased what Hagar said? If you - or Nikky for that matter - believe so, then you've got grounds for laying a broadcasting standards complaint with Radio New Zealand. FFS, it's not as if there's not enough to ping National Radio for without positing that Brash got an on-air handjob from Plunkett or anyone else at National Radio today.
-
Hager is a loon. I'm not concerned if he wants to come up with yet more stupid conspiracies. It is the Labour Party, through their sudden desire to paint him as a respectable investigative journalist, who have credibility issues here.
Where are they doing this?
-
there is gathering speculation that the emails have already posined brash and the next person that it might take is John Key.
This means good news for Bill English.
I've been out of the country for a while but isn't that the same as something being good news for Clark? Surely English is still regarded as fairly wet and uninteresting?
-
IP,
Nah..c'mon...you're just bored and winding us up eh?
I for one can't recall Labour recently pulling Hager into their collective bosom....
Apologies for the possible visual there...
-
Tristan:
there is gathering speculation that the emails have already posined brash and the next person that it might take is John Key.
This means good news for Bill English.
Which makes him a prime suspect for leaking the material in the first place...
-
Ah, so those six "National sources" Hagar talks so much about where Mary and the kids. Gee... that explains so much. Sorry, but all this 'gathering speculation" is enormous fun, but about as credible as those cult leaders who've been predicting the world will end next Tuesday for years. :)
-
I/S: You keep repeating the claim that the documents were leaked, without any substance.
Why would Bill English receive 50,000 private emails between Don Brash and others?
This is stolen correspondence. If Hager believes that he is not the recipient of stolen correspondence, then he is not covered by the court injunction, and is free to publish his book.
I wouldn't be surprised if Hager used the injunction to publicise his book: if his material was leaked, rather than stolen, then nothing prevents him from releasing his book.
-
Maybe you've met him yourself, and had some in-depth political discussions with him, and are therefore entitled to label him a 'fringe socialist'. Personally, from the knowledge that I have of him he's a long way from the socialist fringe.
Kyle - I suspect that for some commentators of the kiwiblog variety, anything short of a full-blown neocon revolution is extremist socialism ("red in tooth and claw").
Just like for some on the other side of the spectrum, anything short of a proletarian revolution and nationalization of the means of production (preferrably by noon tomorrow) is a cop out to the capitalist class.
Both types are very, very boring and best avoided at social events.
-
David Slack:
The question it leaves us in this context is: in what other contexts, if any, does he take the view, for high, low, paternal, or other motives, that what he tells the public need not square with what he actually knows?
Well, I've documented a couple since the election:
And I have my suspicions about his sudden change of heart on asset sales and climate change as well.
-
Which makes him a prime suspect for leaking the material in the first place...
I like that...has the ring of occam's to it...
Bring on the rise of the south...
-
Which makes him a prime suspect for leaking the material in the first place...
I REALLY can't see English - or even Brian Connell - deciding to spill their guts to Nicky Hagar.
-
Both types are very, very boring and best avoided at social events.
clap, clap , clap. hear hear.
even the use of the word 'socialist' automatically imparts an air of hysteria to a commentator.
even if the email-derived content can be extracted from the book, we'll still have the remainder of it to read. black-block text censoring a la gitmo anyone?
-
Why would Bill English receive 50,000 private emails between Don Brash and others?
Where'd you get that number from? Did obtaining it . . . hurt?
-
IP:
You keep repeating the claim that the documents were leaked, without any substance.
And to flip that around: National party supporters keep alleging that they were stolen by government hackers or some such conspiracy theory, on the basis that Brash has apparently asked his close associates and staff and all have denied it. Well, they're hardly likely to say "yes Don, I dunnit", are they?
It's a simple matter of evidence. We know that National is a hotbed of ambitious, backbiting politicians who will at least occasionally work to undermine the leader they publicly support. And we know that they leak material to the media if it serves their purposes - as all good politicians do. Furthermore, we know that there is no evidence of hacking, and we have people who say that they acquired the material from National Party Sources. I'd say that all makes for a compelling case for the existence of internal leakers.
But clearly, that would require admitting that National's PR that it is a united party full of upright, honest men who fully support the leader is false. So obviously, it must have been Labour's secret team of elite stealth hackers instead.
-
the email's were leaked by an insider.
yeah you can say they were stolen, they were stolen by an insider.
David Farrar has tried to tell everyone "leaking good, stealing bad"
"leaking" is basically stealing for a good reason.
sure you can induldge in fantasy about black robed ninja's breaking in from the cealing and hacking computers but we all know someone was sitting at don brashs's desk, click "select all" and clicked "forward"
My guess is they probaley went to labour and nz first and others (the fun thing about email is the "BCC" command)
The poltical parties saw the emails and decided it was to hot for them and reached for the cloak and dagger phone and used that tricky "forward" button to send it to Hagar.
-
i'm picking a mass dump of emails from an employee sick of the sexual harassment.
now there's a conspiracy theory with legs.
legs that should have been in the kitchen making neenish tarts and a cup of earl grey, aeh?
-
"leaking" is basically stealing for a good reason.
The legal commentator on Nine to Noon today seemed to me to be saying that "leaking" is not stealing. "Leaking" is the term used for when information is legally accessible by a group of people who (wisely or unwisely) trust each other. If one of them passes the information outside the group, we call it a "leak". If someone outside the group takes the information directly, is it "stealing". Stealing is a more serious matter.
If the e-mail was stolen, then I'm uncertain as to how I feel abut it being published.
If the e-mail was leaked without Brash's approval, then Brash probably needs to rethink his IT policies. -
The legal commentator also said that 'stealing' - theft - is when you take something from somebody without the colour of right with a view to depriving them of it.
The thing about information being, you can sneak it off someone and they still have it.
Actually, if you were looking for helpful information, that guy was just frustrating.
Whether the court would consider a 'leaked' email not to be 'stolen' for the purposes of the order - and what you would have to reveal in order to prove one or the other - is something I wouldn't want to tangle with if it was me.
-
i'm picking a mass dump of emails from an employee sick of the sexual harassment.
now there's a conspiracy theory with legs.
Now, now, Che. You're straying into the gutter of private life innuendo. Next thing you know, someone will mention the Whalerider.
-
If the e-mail was stolen, then I'm uncertain as to how I feel abut it being published.
Well, Brian Edwards was pretty unequivocal in condemning the use of "stolen" emails by Hager yesterday.
I cannot see any party in NZ doing that to their opponents, what they do internally to each other is a different story c.f. "Yes Minister :-) I really don't think politicians here are that low (despite some pretty hysterical claims to the contrary here and elsewhere).
Post your response…
This topic is closed.