Dirty Politics: Nicky Hager's New Book

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

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | ... | 18

835 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

# 1109422 16-Aug-2014 10:37

turnin: A swing activist aye. These dirty truth tellers, Next he'll be hiding out in the russian embassy.

Why are you trying to portray Hager as apolitical?

rmt38

320 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

# 1109423 16-Aug-2014 10:39

The LP under Cunliffe seems to have been unprepared to "make the most" of Hager's allegations. I get the feeling ...

The problem LP has, is that they have made so much of things, which they have turned out to at least have the appearance of also being involved. Donghua Liu. Secret trusts. Cunliffe also being a rich prick. Etc. It's no wonder people look at both parties, and say, they both do it. Add to that the questionable legality of Hager's actions. Add to that the fact that Slater claims he receives tips from Green and Labour members when it suits them, and they're at the grace of the hacker in not having been drawn into this by Hager only getting National-related emails (something I believe Hager wouldn't lie about, as he has attacked LP in the past). It's a huge mess, and Labour does well to not pile on. Hopefully their recent botched efforts are at an end.

Your feeling is goes both ways. There are a subset of people who use any excuse to use information on their side, who will ignore all details and focus on the idea it might do harm to the other side. Just go to The Standard and read any comment section. Or Kiwiblog. Like for instance continually asserting Hager's participation as leaking without substantiation and ignoring the possibility of anything else. Or pretty much portray Hager as a top class journalist, which he isn't. Whether he is actually a journalist, is something I cannot say, but I find him to be a disappointment and wish he was more effective and competent. It would be good for all of us, and the country.

Anyone who says Hager is a journalist should watch the TV segments where he faces up to someone who challenges him, and he can barely come across as having even actually written the book. It's disappointing. We need books like this book was supposed to be, and done properly, not quickly with methods that none of us would like having done to ourselves.

gzt

11026 posts

Uber Geek

# 1109424 16-Aug-2014 11:00

gzt: Hager friendly interview on tv3+1 now. I'd expect to hear more of his side of the story.

Well that was not really an interview and not very enlightening either.

Dynamike

158 posts

Master Geek

# 1109467 16-Aug-2014 13:14

2 people support this post

turnin:
KiwiNZ: Hager is not a professional journalist, he is a political activist.

His stories involve politics and many have been critical of Labour members, so the left wing accusations are just that
I'm guessing you havent read the book

Nicky Hager was once actively involved in the Values Party, he even stood as a candidate if I remember correctly.

The Values Party and Socialist Unity Party used to be the main left wing political parties in NZ.

The Green Party was founded by former members of Values and SUP. For example, Rod Donald and Jeanette Fitzsimons we're former members of Values, Keith Locke was SUP.

Hager's latest book was published by Craig Potton Publishing. Craig Potton is a former candidate for the Green Party.

I think it's reasonable to assume that Nicky Hager follows a left wing political ideology.

MikeB4

14582 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

# 1109503 16-Aug-2014 14:28

One person supports this post

Personally I see both Hager and Slater as the same, both are neither professional nor unbiased or offer information correctly gained or verified before publication.

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

There is no planet B

gzt

11026 posts

Uber Geek

# 1109509 16-Aug-2014 15:12

One person supports this post

In the brief panel discussion on TV3 today Hager specifically defended "the left", and may have made some comments specifically against "the right". I would quote the exact phrases used but it (August 16) is not on demand yet. It should appear here sometime:

http://www.tv3.co.nz/tabid/3692/MCat/2910/Default.aspx

It is more accurate to describe him as a left wing journalist than an activist. As a journalist he reports on themes of abuse of government power and lack of integrity from government. He applied this to the actions and political communication of the previous Labour govt, and I don't see any reason he would not apply that to a potential future green government. People like Hager are essential to the functioning of a democracy.

Slater now and then admits to being paid by public relations consultants and other interested parties in relation to some content. Hager is more a traditional journalist type.

turnin

509 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

# 1109518 16-Aug-2014 15:28

If hagar has written books that the left and books that attack the right abd books that upset police and books that upset spy agencies etc then his political bias looks a lot more flexible than keys concrete claim that he is a left wing conspiracy theorist.
What is important is what's in the book. The hacking of the labour party computer is minor compared with what that information was used for. Slater spoke from isreal or korea today, he seems to have a bit of geographic amnesia but has admitted to goimg into labours database and admitted he was leaked public servants names by collins. bevan chuang has also said slater blackmailed her.
You cant write all of this off as "JUST POLITICS"
There is an intent here which is getting pretty hard to deny.

BarTender

2949 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1109527 16-Aug-2014 16:02

One person supports this post

I purchased it yesterday from Amazon and started reading it. So far it's pretty damming stuff up to chapter 2.

To me the main points so far are:

- I am yet to see any politician categorically deny specific statements apart from John Key et al deny the whole book as "rubbish". Plus I have yet to see court proceedings from Cameron Slater / Judith Collins et al to start against Nicky Hager for defamation so I am inclined to believe that it's accurate.

- A lot is said by National that "It's just politics" however I have yet to see anyone else behave as badly as the pro-National lot. I think Trevor mallard is the worst of the left... And he's a pussycat in comparison to Slater.

- The "nice guy" front and "nasty attack dogs" seems to be the modus operandi... Is this really what we as a country want to be like? Aren't we better than that?

I think one of the best quotes so far in the book is in the preface:

Important issues surround the use of leaked communications. First, everyone has the right to keep their communications private and there must be a very high public interest to justify publishing them. In this case, I believe most readers will agree that the materials raise very serious matters of political accountability, relating directly to the prime minister and other senior government ministers. They show a continuous collaboration between the prime minister’s office, bloggers and sympathetic media to arrange attacks on National’s opponents and to influence elections. This differs from the story and face presented by the National Party to the public and helps to explain much about what is wrong with contemporary politics. On the other hand, there was also a considerable amount of very personal information about relationships and other subjects, where the right to privacy outweighs any public interest. This material has not been included in the book and will not be passed to others. The fact that Slater and his associates have made a career of exposing the very private details of other people’s lives does not make it right to do that to them.

My own bolding added in there, to me that reads "there was a lot of dirt I didn't publish" and that I suspect is probably why the Nat's aren't pushing the legal avenue too hard with Hager... as things could potentially get even more ugly.

and

Dingbatt

4160 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

# 1109545 16-Aug-2014 16:28

I don''t believe there will be any court action. Hager is cleverer than that. I understand there is a fairly liberal use of "could" and "might" and "in my opinion" in the book which effectively makes it his opinion, which he is fully entitled to publish.

By way of an example consider the following;
I have found a 2 in close proximity to a 1. I am not certain if they are connected by an operand or not. So the result of these two numbers is anywhere from 0.5 to 21 depending how I care to connect them. So in my opinion the answer is 21 (which also happens to be half the answer to life, the universe and everything).

Areas of Geek interest: Home Theatre, HTPC, Android Tablets & Phones, iProducts.

JimmyH

2648 posts

Uber Geek

# 1109555 16-Aug-2014 16:52

Glassboy:

Given that most of Hager's material has been disputed, if not completely disproved - for example the Rodney Hide "blackmail" - I don't think you can consider any of the emails\facebook chats "indisputable". There's also no verification that the "source material" is unaltered. Just as there is no verification that the hackers aren't politically motivated or aligned with a political party.

Exactly.

Firstly Hager isn't a journalist in the normal sense of the word, he is a political activist from way back. Which doesn't mean what he says is necessarily wrong when he says something, but that has to be borne in mind when weighing whether he is being objective and unbiased when he opines on a particular subject.

Secondly, he hasn't yet "proved" anything. All we have is his interpretation an portrayal of what a large number of emails allegedly say/show. I'm not aware that we, or any other political reporter, have had an opportunity to sight the emails in question or verify what he is saying. All we have is Hager's word that he has the emails claimed, that they are all genuine, and that an unbiased summation of them really does portray what he claims they portray.

Which is all a bit different to (say) Snowden - where a number of credible journalists working for credible news outlets all had a chance to sight his material and confirm what was being reported about them.

What he says has to be treated as unsubstantiated allegations from a known political activist, unless he actually takes steps to substantiate them. Publishing the emails, or at least allowing a couple of credible mainstream third to review them to verify what they actually say, is required for this. He has made serious allegations, he needs to either (quickly) put up his actual evidence, or retract.

As far as I am concerned, while Hager and Slater are from opposite sides of the political spectrum, they are both cut from the same cloth and are thoroughly obnoxious individuals. I wouldn't have either of them over for a barbecue or a beer.

BarTender

2949 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1109563 16-Aug-2014 17:25

One person supports this post

Dingbatt: I don''t believe there will be any court action. Hager is cleverer than that. I understand there is a fairly liberal use of "could" and "might" and "in my opinion" in the book which effectively makes it his opinion, which he is fully entitled to publish.

By way of an example consider the following;
I have found a 2 in close proximity to a 1. I am not certain if they are connected by an operand or not. So the result of these two numbers is anywhere from 0.5 to 21 depending how I care to connect them. So in my opinion the answer is 21 (which also happens to be half the answer to life, the universe and everything).

You obviously haven't read the book. Plenty of very bold statements that if incorrect would get you in hot water.

JimmyH: Secondly, he hasn't yet "proved" anything. All we have is his interpretation an portrayal of what a large number of emails allegedly say/show. I'm not aware that we, or any other political reporter, have had an opportunity to sight the emails in question or verify what he is saying. All we have is Hager's word that he has the emails claimed, that they are all genuine, and that an unbiased summation of them really does portray what he claims they portray.

Feel free to read Secret Power back in 1996..... then think again what Snowden / Assange et al have done in more recent times considering Snowden was an employee yet in Secret Power it was interviews with ex-employees in the days before "the internet" and the blogosphere existed. Thing a book like that would get written in this day and age.... I doubt it.

However he does have quite a track record for being right (and owning up to things when he got it wrong). If I were a betting man I would say he's most likely to be spot on.

and

Dingbatt

4160 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

# 1109573 16-Aug-2014 18:01

BarTender:
Dingbatt: I don''t believe there will be any court action. Hager is cleverer than that. I understand there is a fairly liberal use of "could" and "might" and "in my opinion" in the book which effectively makes it his opinion, which he is fully entitled to publish.

By way of an example consider the following;
I have found a 2 in close proximity to a 1. I am not certain if they are connected by an operand or not. So the result of these two numbers is anywhere from 0.5 to 21 depending how I care to connect them. So in my opinion the answer is 21 (which also happens to be half the answer to life, the universe and everything).

You obviously haven't read the book. Plenty of very bold statements that if incorrect would get you in hot water.

Yep, and I am not going to read his book. I haven't read any of his previous ones. Can't stand the man or his politics. But I have tried to stay dispassionately neutral in this thread.
I did compose quite a long reply but in the end I can't be arsed. I'll stick to tech I think.

Areas of Geek interest: Home Theatre, HTPC, Android Tablets & Phones, iProducts.

astrae

254 posts

Ultimate Geek

# 1109574 16-Aug-2014 18:04

One person supports this post

Reading the latest news about Labour being 'Hacked' is just painful to read and a joke....

If you aren't aware of the 'hacking', labour had their whole website open so you could browse every directory and download any file. Google even cached these files and databases so they are as guilty as everyone else for 'hacking'...

Here is the video Cameron Slater posted back in 2011

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnOAeVaU5xM

BarTender

2949 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1109592 16-Aug-2014 18:23

One person supports this post

Dingbatt: Yep, and I am not going to read his book. I haven't read any of his previous ones. Can't stand the man or his politics. But I have tried to stay dispassionately neutral in this thread.
I did compose quite a long reply but in the end I can't be arsed. I'll stick to tech I think.

So how can you say

Dingbatt: I have found a 2 in close proximity to a 1. I am not certain if they are connected by an operand or not. So the result of these two numbers is anywhere from 0.5 to 21 depending how I care to connect them. So in my opinion the answer is 21 (which also happens to be half the answer to life, the universe and everything).

Since you openly admit you haven't read it or and say the above, sounds a bit hypocritical if you ask me....

Lets just all put our heads in the sand and pretend anything isn't going on around us. Meh it doesn't matter to me because I prefer ignorance and apathy than education. Or someone who's a Luddite.. rather that someone who works in Technology. Sad.. Just sad.

and

BarTender

2949 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1109594 16-Aug-2014 18:29

2 people support this post

astrae: Reading the latest news about Labour being 'Hacked' is just painful to read and a joke....

If you aren't aware of the 'hacking', labour had their whole website open so you could browse every directory and download any file. Google even cached these files and databases so they are as guilty as everyone else for 'hacking'...

Here is the video Cameron Slater posted back in 2011

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnOAeVaU5xM

The problem is if you actually bother to read the book, basically Slater and Ede who is the PM's chief staffer worked together to make the maximum political damage they possibly could including releasing peoples names from the database. To me that is criminal behavior much like finding there is an issue on a site and blackmailing the owner a certain amount of money before informing them what the issue is.

It's exactly the same behavior Anonymous do. To me I see Slater's & Ede's behavior far more malicious than Anonmous Doxing someone.

and

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | ... | 18