Dirty Politics: Nicky Hager's New Book

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Dirty Politics: Nicky Hager's New Book

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 18

1187 posts

Uber Geek

#1108461 14-Aug-2014 15:30

ajobbins: I haven't made up my mind about this, however the following largely reflects my thoughts on the matter
- Hagar is a well regarded journalist with a proven track record and as far as I can tell, is well known for his fact checking and journalistic integrity.

- He has written books exposing negative things about both sides of politics. This to me diminishes a view of bias. It also pays to remember that EVERYONE has a political bias to some degree, but the sign of a good journalist is that they can disconnect from their own bias and write with integrity based on well researched fact. Hagar, by most accounts, seems to meet the criteria.

Slater says that he receives email regularly from people in Labour and Greens, passing information on to him. Hager would have those emails. If Hager isn't similarly criticising Labour and Green insiders, then his is showing his bias.

- Hagar didn't steal any emails. He was leaked them. Unless something surfaces to prove otherwise, my understanding is that he hasn't done anything wrong by releasing the information as it is in the public interest.

Leaked vs hacked is a trivial distinction. Somebody had to have hacked Slater's private email and then leaked it to Hager. Irrespective of how you want to frame it, Hager has published a book based on stolen emails.

- Slater and Farrar haven't denied the content of the leaked information, indeed they appear to have confirmed it by statements about pressing charges about it being obtained.

They've hardly had a chance to, have they? The book has only just been released and neither Slater nor Farrar received advance copies. Slater said Hager never contacted him to get his take on events.

- Slater has also heavily defended the access of Labour party information that was unsecured, saying that because it was unsecured, he was entitled to take it and use it. My understanding of the law (which could be wrong) is that that isn't a defence, and that if he knew he wasn't supposed to have the information, taking it anyway could still be an offence.

So it's not okay for Slater to report on unsecured Labour information, but it's okay for Hager to report on stolen emails that were hacked and then leaked?

- The defence from those implicated in this book seem to be almost exclusively personal attacks against Hagar, or the way the information was obtained, rather than attacks against the arguments or the information itself.

Again, Slater doesn't even have a copy yet. He has commented on his website on a few things that the media has highlighted. You could take a look at his website?

ripdog

548 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1108468 14-Aug-2014 15:34

Oooh, ooh, keep deflecting, rightwingers! I'm almost at bingo!

http://dimpost.wordpress.com/2014/08/13/nicky-hager-spin-bingo/

Whew, this spin is making me dizzy!

nathan: sounds like its OK to have 6 years worth of Gmail and Facebook messages hacked, as long as its someone you don't like and you're on the left

It's okay when it's in the public interest and reveals wrongdoing by public officals. I don't give a flying F about your 'right to privacy' if you only care about said right when it might keep your shady dealings under wraps. It's truely amazing how Geekzoners will cheer on Snowden and then attack Nicky's informer for doing the same when it doesn't suit their political goals. If shady stuff is happening in government, we should forgive any illegal acts used to uncover it.

I apologise for the lack of proper syntax from this point on, but I am not typing that much bbcode. Markdown, please!

>Yawn.

> I'm only surprised that anyone is surprised.

What I'm amazed about is the apathy of NZers. Do you know how democracies work? They work through the participation of every citizen. You have to care. You have to make your opinions heard. If politicans are playing dirty, call them out on it, make it an election issue and make sure they know that dirty dealers won't be elected. Saying Yawn is simply condoning that behaviour.

>Nothing - he is left wing and I never trust anyone that foolish.

Doesn't get more foolish than someone who has obviously formed his opinion of someone from a single blog post on Whale Oil. Nicky also published a book called "Seeds of Distrust". Heard of it? Because it caused a big blow to Aunty Helens campaign, uncovering shady dealings regarding an accidental release of GM and subsequent coverup. Nicky Hager is an upstanding guy and one of the few trustworthy journalists left in NZ.

And I say this as a dreaded lefty.

>The timing also strikes me as aiming to maximise sales and publicity - not some noble intention to inform the public.

Amazing how right-wingers (not sure if you specifically are one, I mean in general) love to deify successful businesspeople and happily stand up for businesses pursuing profit over people, but when an investigative journalist tries to take money as well as inform the public - suddenly he's the devil!

>TV3 Campbell live last night, he doesn't look like a confident, trustworthy, genuine person to me

Yeah, I'm sure his lack of confidence when speaking on national TV means everything he wrote is a lie. What?

>Nicky Hager = a guy trying to make a quick buck by throwing a few assumptions into a book.

What? You haven't even read the book and you say this? All informed commentary about the book so far has talked about it being very well researched and backed by evidence.

>Anything that keeps Labour out is justified in my view in any case.

Rather amusing seeing that considering how much damage this will do to National. Also, condoning actions like this because you don't like the target is like condoning torture - as long as it's performed on people I don't like!

That attitude is despicable and has no place in a civilized country.

>If you think both parties aren't doing the same thing, you are dreaming.

If you're referring to the various scandals that National ministers have been embroiled in during their time in parliament: those were all their own doing. Public (as in governmental) figures deserve no privacy in regards to their jobs - their mistakes affect us all. If you have any examples of truly personal attacks, feel free to share, but if it's about how they screwed up their jobs, then it's called whistleblowing. And that's good - I will welcome whistleblowing when the Left makes it back into power, too.

Faced with evidence like this, righties have nothing left but downplay, deflect, and attack the messenger. Sad.

gzt

17149 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1108469 14-Aug-2014 15:34

networkn:
Geektastic:
ajobbins: Obviously this has been widely reported in the media. What is everyones thoughts?

Damaging Revelations? Stuff we always suspected, but now have proof? Nicky Hager is a screaming left-wing conspiracy theorist? Yawn?

Yawn. It's just politics and frankly I have no doubt all parties do all kinds of stuff. Hager isn't trustworthy enough for me not to double check if he told me it was raining.

Anything that keeps Labour out is justified in my view in any case.

This made my day and reflects my opinion entirely. Thanks!

eXDee: For anyone wanting a general summary of whats in it, found this:
http://dimpost.wordpress.com/2014/08/13/dirty-politics-summary/

There are many extremely serious allegations in the above which have nothing to do with left/right politics. Example quotes:

Collins appears to have had a prisoner transferred at Slater’s request,

Collins discusses the illegal leaking of police evidence with Slater and publication of the evidence on Slater’s blog (at the time she was Minister of Police)

Anyone concerned with the integrity of our democracy should have a problem with that kind of behavior if it is proven to have occured. If you accept this kind of governance, well you are pretty much guaranteed to see more of it from all parties and that would be a very bad thing.

I have not read the book and have no idea what source material these allegations are based on and if they are worthy of investigation. However from reading the summary linked above I can see there are several allegations like the above which are not related to left/right politics and dirt digging.

ajobbins

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1108502 14-Aug-2014 15:52

Journeyman:Slater says that he receives email regularly from people in Labour and Greens, passing information on to him. Hager would have those emails. If Hager isn't similarly criticising Labour and Green insiders, then his is showing his bias.

That depends. You assume that the person who leaked the emails to Hagar handed over everything they stole. What's to say they only handed over emails relating to the National Party. Slater has said today he has about 80GB of emails, Hagar said he was given about 8GB of material. Either what was stolen was limited to a subset of Slater's email, or what was handed over was screened.

Leaked vs hacked is a trivial distinction. Somebody had to have hacked Slater's private email and then leaked it to Hager. Irrespective of how you want to frame it, Hager has published a book based on stolen emails.

Is it a crime for a journalist to publish details of these emails, in the public interest, if they weren't a party to the theft? IANAL, so I dunno - but from many comments it seems not.

Is it a crime to hack in and steal the emails in the first place. Yep, but Hagar didn't commit that crime. Go after the hacker (if they can be identified).

They've hardly had a chance to, have they? The book has only just been released and neither Slater nor Farrar received advance copies. Slater said Hager never contacted him to get his take on events.

Sure, more will develop on this, however comments from Slater seem to confirm that his emails have been obtained, therefore they will largely speak for themselves.

So it's not okay for Slater to report on unsecured Labour information, but it's okay for Hager to report on stolen emails that were hacked and then leaked?

Slater obtained the material himself. He was the thief. Just because the information is not secure, doesn't mean it's OK to take it. If a National Party staffer walked past the office of a Labour staffer and notices an unlocked PC and no one around - is it OK for them to open that persons files and take a copy? No. Just like it's not OK for someone to hack into Slaters emails and take then. These are illegal acts. Just because it wasn't properly secured, doesn't mean it's a free for all, especially if it's clear it's not supposed to be public information.

However - once they have been obtained, that largely doesn't matter. The information is known - and if in the public interest and shows potential corruption and crime, should be exposed.

If someone had said to Hager, "Hey, here is Slater's email password - log in and take a few things", it would be a different story.

Again, Slater doesn't even have a copy yet. He has commented on his website on a few things that the media has highlighted. You could take a look at his website?

I won't waste any bandwidth going to his website. I've seen plenty of his comments via the MSM. We'll see how this develops.

Twitter: ajobbins

ajobbins

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1108507 14-Aug-2014 15:59

One assertion in this book particularly interest me.

It is alleged that the SIS specifically de-classified information regarding a political opponent which Slater was able to OIA under guidance from John Key's office.

John Key has very recently (and successfully) pushed for greater surveillance powers for the SIS and GCSB. At the time I commented that surveillance information could be used by an incumbent government as a method of selectively discrediting opposition to their regime - which appears to be (if true), specifically what has happened here.

Imagine if the PM also had all (at least the meta data) of the opposition's emails, phone calls, SMS messages, bank records etc available to him. Or Hagar's (or any other journalist or influential figure that spoke against the government).

Twitter: ajobbins

Dingbatt

6756 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1108516 14-Aug-2014 16:21

This "Campaign" is already so much fun. I'm just trying to work out who is Marty Huggins and who is Cam Brady. and more importantly who is playing the part of the Motch brothers.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1790886/

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1108537 14-Aug-2014 17:04

It's of zero interest.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

Batman

Mad Scientist
29769 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1108539 14-Aug-2014 17:05

$$ ka ching

Zippity

683 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1108540 14-Aug-2014 17:06

"Investigative journalist" and "honest"??!!

Surely that is an oxymoron.

Glassboy

850 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1108592 14-Aug-2014 18:27

ripdog:

It's okay when it's in the public interest and reveals wrongdoing by public officals. I don't give a flying F about your 'right to privacy' if you only care about said right when it might keep your shady dealings under wraps. It's truely amazing how Geekzoners will cheer on Snowden and then attack Nicky's informer for doing the same when it doesn't suit their political goals. If shady stuff is happening in government, we should forgive any illegal acts used to uncover it.

I think it's dangerous to tar all Geekzoners with the same brush. There is a difference between a whistle blower and someone such as Snowden who committed treason. It's also very dangerous to advocate that two wrongs make a right. How would you feel if spyware was installed on your computer(s) because someone felt you were doing something "shady", say having an affair, talking to someone not of your religion etc. All that is also "public interest". And how would you feel if someone then sold the details for money?

I'm sure Hager had Steven Price review the book before it was published (as he did for the Hollow Man), but it would seem several of the people who feel that untrue things have been said about them are Solicitors themselves and will potentially take steps themselves.

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1108594 14-Aug-2014 18:31

muppet: This is the sort of stuff morons get excited about.

And here we have the best answer in this thread

turnin

509 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1108609 14-Aug-2014 18:43

ajobbins: One assertion in this book particularly interest me. It is alleged that the SIS specifically de-classified information regarding a political opponent which Slater was able to OIA under guidance from John Key's office.

John Key has very recently (and successfully) pushed for greater surveillance powers for the SIS and GCSB. At the time I commented that surveillance information could be used by an incumbent government as a method of selectively discrediting opposition to their regime - which appears to be (if true), specifically what has happened here.

Imagine if the PM also had all (at least the meta data) of the opposition's emails, phone calls, SMS messages, bank records etc available to him. Or Hagar's (or any other journalist or influential figure that spoke against the government).

Just picked the book up today, up to page 60. It looks like just about every scandal thats come to light, came to light because it was planned.
You can't just say "it's politics", if I steal something I can't turn around and say " oh well , thats human nature".
If 10% of what I've read is true , which I'm pretty dam sure it is, it's going to be very damaging for Keys government when most of his supporters expect professionalism and ethics.
Best example yet of media shooting the messenger and binning the message.
Regardless of our individual political views the public needs to be informed properly and political parties need to act within certain bounds of decency.

ajobbins

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1108619 14-Aug-2014 19:24

turnin: If 10% of what I've read is true , which I'm pretty dam sure it is, it's going to be very damaging for Keys government when most of his supporters expect professionalism and ethics.

Part of the problem, however, as demonstrated in this very thread is that many of Key's supporters don't expect professionalism and ethics at all. They expect Key to do whatever it takes to keep "the left" in opposition. Whatever the cost; moral, financial or legal, it seems many think it's just fine and justified.

Twitter: ajobbins

Tinshed

278 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1108626 14-Aug-2014 19:45

John Key has very recently (and successfully) pushed for greater surveillance powers for the SIS and GCSB. At the time I commented that surveillance information could be used by an incumbent government as a method of selectively discrediting opposition to their regime - which appears to be (if true), specifically what has happened here.

Absolute bollocks. Please come back and comment when you have read and understood the process by which interception warrants are issued. The view that the GSCB surveillance powers are somehow morally equivalent to an individual, or group of individuals like Anonymous, hacking a private citizen's emails beggars belief.

Tinshed
Wellington, New Zealand

Lias

5589 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1108635 14-Aug-2014 20:16

Tinshed:
The view that the GSCB surveillance powers are somehow morally equivalent to an individual, or group of individuals like Anonymous, hacking a private citizen's emails beggars belief.

I agree.. having the government spy on it's citizens is a MUCH greater crime, and far more morally reprehensible.

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 18