Hager’s spin
Nicky Hager claims the Police said the following:
“The Police had to address issues of ‘theft’ and ’stealing’ because that is what Don Brash alleged. But in today’s finding the Police are saying they have no idea how the leaks occurred and that they have found no evidence of any crime being committed.”
”This was always going to be the outcome because the information came from legitimate leaks. I believe the National Party used the allegations of theft, and thereby wasted Police resources, to try to distract attention away from the serious revelations in the book.”
Nicky would have you think hey the Police said no crime here, move along. But let us look at what they did say:
Police have closed their investigation into the theft of e-mails from former National Party leader Dr Don Brash and have announced that they have been unsuccessful in identifying those responsible for the thefts.
Hmmn, they called them thefts. Not leaks.
Detective Inspector Harry Quinn, the Officer in Charge of the investigation and Wellington Police District Crime Services Manager, said today that police had been unable to establish with certainty how the e-mails had actually been stolen.
And here they say the e-mails were stolen – they just don’t know how.
“How the thefts occurred still largely remains a mystery,” said Detective Inspector Quinn. “We have eliminated the suggestion that an external ‘computer hacker’ had breached the computer security within Parliament but there remains many other potential ways in which the crimes could have occurred.”
Again they repeat this was a theft, and all they rule out is an “external” hacker. This does not rule out numerous other scenarios such as a IT staffer with system access, an insecure password, or even someone taking advantage of a computer left logged in.
“There are strong indications that the e-mails were in printed form at the time of the theft, but with the thefts perhaps happening at any time over the two- year period it is very likely that they were stolen during several incidents,” Detective Inspector Quinn said.
I have no idea if the thefts were done of print outs, of electronic files or a mixture of both. But I would point out that someone sneaking into someone’s office, rummaging through their filing cabinet, and then taking papers from that filing cabinet is not a leak, but as the Police say – theft.
A leak is when you release information you legitimately have access to. Take for example the draft Green Party List that was leaked to me. A Green Party member who legitimately had a copy of the list, leaked it. Now that is massively different to a scenario where say only two people had a copy of the Green Party List and it was stored in Jeanette Fitzsimons’ office, and someone entered that office without authorisation, rummaged through her laptop or office files, and then stole a copy of the list, to give it to me.
April 17th, 2008 at 6:27 am
Hager couldn’t lie straight in bed, because he is under a wicked Helengrad spell and he thinks the truth is wrapped in a red plastic chocolate bar. Also he has a serious leak in his head, so that explains why the timid wimp has ratfink features.
[DPF: And that is 10 demerits for personal abuse not relevant to the issue]
April 17th, 2008 at 6:33 am
But David surely you must know in the present political climate that no law, whther it be based around privacy or financial dealings, should be used as proof against a system that believes that the ends justify the means.
IF it was an inside job – it has political ramifications for the internal operations of the National Party.
IF IT WASN’T – imagine the political ramifications it would have for the Labour Party, and the nation.
Given the reent track-records of the two parties, and if you were a betting man, where would you put your money?
If you had to name one individual from either main Party, who would it be?
Who would think something like this would be considered a ‘Bloody good idea.’ If they were sure they could get away with it?
April 17th, 2008 at 6:42 am
So assuming it was along the lines of rummaging through the files and passing them on, what do journalistic ethics say about using material so obtained?
April 17th, 2008 at 6:43 am
So, if one applies good old Occam’s Razor to the problem it is crystal clear that hard copies of these emails were stolen by someone who had regular access to Dr Brash’s documentary files and a good working knowledge of what was in them and how they were stored.
This theft was thus unquestionably an inside job.
A PA or secretary [junior office staffer] would have the means and possibly the motive, but would be unlikely to have the deviousness, sophistication and connections to pass the files over to Hager. [Unhappy junior staff invariably go postal in a short and sharp way if they want to escalate a grievance into a crisis for the boss.] So a junior office staffer is unlikely.
It therefore seems clear that more senior members of the National party who were unhappy with Dr Brash and who were very well informed of his office arrangements are the prime suspects – perhaps not in personally pinching and copying the documents [that would have been a junior office accomplice] – but definitely masterminding the overall process of thieving them and hooking them through to Hager.
The police investigation would obviously run into a wall of silence if, as seems probable, the whole scenario was run by a cadre of senior National big-wigs wanting to mangle Dr Brash’s spokes.
Now who would those people most likely to be………?
April 17th, 2008 at 6:52 am
Dad:
“he thinks the truth is wrapped in a red plastic chocolate bar.”
WTF is a plastic chocolate bar?
“Also he has a serious leak in his head”
That would make two of you.
April 17th, 2008 at 6:53 am
Flashman, you miss a few key points however. If memory serves me right National was polling reasonably well until those emails were revealed. The damage caused by the selective interpretation of them and the pariah of the Exclusive Brethren, another wonderful smear campaign orchestrated by the Greens and the Labour Party, was substansive. And people would know this was going to be an end result.
Do you honestly think a cadre of senior National big-wigs would damage the party for 3 or even more years and give that much opportunity for Labour and the Greens to build a cardhouse of lies just to get rid of Don Brash?
Talk about cutting your nose to spite your face.
A more credible answer is that Don Brash and the resurgent National Party, with the support of more and more New Zealanders who had grown sick of the endemic corruption and mismanagement of the Labour Party and the Green Party had become a threat. A threat that had to be neutralised at any cost. Thus, their personal communiques were intercepted, stolen, whatever and twisted to such a degree that it would reflect badly on them. It was a smear campaign to destroy their opposition, and Labour and the Greens succeeded in that. They’ve been running a virtual pogrom on the Brethren, the National Party and anyone who dares to stand in their way ever since.
However, as the polling have shown us recently, New Zealand is cottoning on to the lies, the corruption and the illness that is our government. Their more than likely theft of the emails might have been successful, they might have been able to run a successful smear campaign, but in the end they’re bound to lose. Dishonesty only gets you so far.
April 17th, 2008 at 7:01 am
Sorry about the confusion with the chocolate bar David Coverdule, as I foolishly thought everything is made in China plastic these days and my leak is different to that of Hager the Horribles distortion and psychosis.
April 17th, 2008 at 7:02 am
The opposition offices and the leaders hall are not really places where you can just wander around rummaging through filing cabinets and accessing computers you don’t have access to. And a glance through the bibliography of ‘The Hollow Men’ shows that Hagar’s source had access to not only the leaders office and email but also those of other campaign staff and senior ministers over an extended period of time. As I’ve said before the thefts/leaks were almost certainly carried out by a PA or other member of the support staff.
And if that’s the case then its entirely possible that the person had legitimate access to the material that was leaked. They might have breached their own confidentiality agreement by handing the documents to Hagar but that is true of all leaker’s – if the person responsible was a PA with legitimate access to Brash’s mail account and filing cabinets then its very hard to argue that their actions were theft.
[DPF: Only two staff had access to the e-mail, and I agree if it was one of them it is a leak, but there was no way it was either of them, as both were personally very loyal to Brash]
April 17th, 2008 at 7:12 am
Lordy lordy… so some liars got found out. But I thought KB were against lying? So isn’t uncovering them a good thing?
I guess it depends on who it is.
April 17th, 2008 at 7:16 am
And I would have thought last year’s APEC forum in Sydney was the one place on earth where it would have been impossible for eleven people with obviously fake IDs could (literally) drive a fake motorcade through allegedly tight security. But it happened.
As I’ve said elsewhere, it’s hard to take Hager’s outraged innocence particularly seriously when he’s the only person who can definitively settle the question. And he’s not talking. IMO “get lost” was an entirely appropriate response from Key.
Of course, Mr. Hager could sue Don Brash, John Key and everyone else (including myself) who’ve so outrageously defamed his personal and professional reputation, and reveal exactly how he obtained them in an open court. But I guess transparency and accountability is for other people.
And if Hager obtained them illegitimately, he’s hardly going to fess up himself and throw his credibility (and livelihood) down the crapper, is he?
April 17th, 2008 at 7:22 am
Michael Bassett has a great line about hagar.
“Nicky Hager resembles something washed up on a Fiordland beach. There’s something of the Ancient Mariner about him, but his views are narrow like the Exclusive Brethren’s he rails against. He sees plots: evil private enterprise; unscrupulous banks; lying public relations companies; a sinister SIS; and now the ever-so-wicked Don Brash.”
Rest of his article in below link
http://www.michaelbassett.co.nz/articleview.php?id=152
April 17th, 2008 at 7:22 am
The uniformed branch of the labour party have stated it was theft. If they were an independent police force free from the deceit, lies and malignant influence of harry clark they would have charged hager with receiving. Unfortunately we have seen many times over the history of this regime that “Labour First” is the over riding management doctrine at police HQ.
April 17th, 2008 at 7:28 am
And I would have thought last year’s APEC forum in Sydney was the one place on earth where it would have been impossible for eleven people with obviously fake IDs could (literally) drive a fake motorcade through allegedly tight security. But it happened.
I could accept that someone might have snuck into Brash’s office once, but the idea that Nicky Hagar managed to sneak past the guards, video cameras, controlled access doors and dozens of National Party staff to plunder the leaders office repeatedly throughout the duration of the election campaign stretches credulity.
[DPF: If it was repeatedly. Sadly we don't know how or how often]
April 17th, 2008 at 7:29 am
Dead right Barnsley Bill, just imagine the police resources used if stolen Helen Clark emails were circulating around the countryside.
Don Brash has every right to be irate about another injustice in the land of corruption.
April 17th, 2008 at 7:32 am
It would be more accurate for both Hager and DPF to write that the Police and we in fact don’t know whether the emails were stolen or leaked. Because we don’t.
April 17th, 2008 at 7:42 am
Charging hager with receiving may help to focus his mind on revealing where he got them from Milt.
April 17th, 2008 at 7:42 am
Dad:
“everything is made in China plastic these days”
WTF is China plastic?
“my leak is different to that of Hager the Horribles distortion and psychosis”
Different, maybe. Less severe, probably not.
April 17th, 2008 at 7:47 am
“..Do you honestly think a cadre of senior National big-wigs would damage the party for 3 or even more years and give that much opportunity for Labour and the Greens to build a cardhouse of lies just to get rid of Don Brash?..”
um..!..yes..
(you left out ‘furthering their own ambitions’..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
April 17th, 2008 at 7:59 am
philu: um..!..yes..
You might shit in your own nest. Most other people don’t.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:01 am
“You might shit in your own nest. Most other people don’t.”
Welcome to the wonderful world of politics!
April 17th, 2008 at 8:04 am
I’m sorry, this remains hilarious. As Flashman points out the evidence clearly points to an inside job, probably involving one or more senior National MPs. No other explanation is plausible. This story was always concocted as spin to try and misdirect the media from the real story of the contents of the book into the sexier and less complicated story of the alleged email theft.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:06 am
The silver lining from all this mess is, IMHO, that if the police use the term “theft”, then the conclusion is that they were stolen. This means that Ian Wisharts book cannot be vilified by the loony left without looking like complete hypocrites.
Actually I might take that back as the loony left already are complete hypocrites and they seem to think that is acceptable behaviour.
MY BAD.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:12 am
Tane: I’m sorry, this remains hilarious. As Flashman points out the evidence clearly points to an insider job,
Don’t lie. You’re not sorry at all. You’re just swallowing more spin because that is what you want to believe; because that is all you myopic, Labour tinged world view will allow you to believe. There are other plausible explanations.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:12 am
Do you think Helen Clark will have to resign over Ian Wishart’s book? My money’s on no.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:16 am
Tane: Do you think Helen Clark will have to resign over Ian Wishart’s book?
I doubt it too. She’s too good at dumping her mistakes on others, avoiding the negative publicity that goes along with her corruption and too practiced at skipping responsibility for what happens. She’s a commensurate politician.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:17 am
Pascal you’re the one trying to rule out the “shitting in your own nest” explanation, when in reality pretty much every leadership coup political party is preceded by the coup plotters destabilizing the incumbent through various means (refusing to back the leader, voting against the party line, refusing to clap the leader at question time [that one happened in the UK a few years back] and so on), all of which can look a lot like shitting in your own nest.
In fact, it is shitting **on the incumbent leader** who is sitting in the nest, so that when the incumbent leaves he carries the shit out with him. Perfectly plausible, perfectly logical. And, it appears from the evidence, the most probable remaining scenario.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:17 am
If the entire National party thinks its theft why was there a LONG LONG delay in reporting to the police.
To make sure the police wouldnt find who did it!
and as for Bassett. The ‘leaked´’ emails show hes not the dispassionate historian he likes people to think, and history will show him as a member of the Brash cabal- with primary sources which arent normally available
April 17th, 2008 at 8:18 am
“She’s a commensurate politician.”
Commensurate with…?
April 17th, 2008 at 8:19 am
Tane – who cares? As Pascal noted above, she will merely abrogate responsibility as usual for everything short of murder, and even then she’d probably try to pin it on David Benson-Pope
April 17th, 2008 at 8:22 am
I suspect you’re the kind of man who thinks rape or domestic abuse victims who don’t lay charges immediately are, ipso facto, lying psychos who needed the time to get their stories straight. For the me, the real issue here is that Hager is the one person who can settle the question either way. That’s a simple matter of fact, unless he wrote this book in some kind of disassociative fuge, which really is the stuff of fairy tales. He’s refused to do so, so perhaps he should spare us the faux outrage when some of us wonder what he’s got to hide.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:24 am
robinsod: Commensurate with…?
Ah crap, forgive a poor Japie – I should have said consummate.
David Coverdale: all of which can look a lot like shitting in your own nest
It can look a lot like it, yes. And it is one thing to destablize the incumbent leader, but it is quite another to push material out that will destablize the party and it’s image. The created stigma of the Exclusive Brethren is not restricted to Brash, Labour and their cronies makes sure this applies to the entirety of the party.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:27 am
“I should have said consummate. “
Commie.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:34 am
Pascal: “The created stigma of the Exclusive Brethren is not restricted to Brash, Labour and their cronies makes sure this applies to the entirety of the party.”
Now look at it from the perspective of the person/people choosing which emails to leak/steal. A plain text reading of Hagar’s book shows comparatively little evidence that Mssrs Key and English were in on any of the Brash-lead shenanigans. Now there could be two explanations for that: (1) they really had nothing to do with it; or intriguingly (2) the leakers/thieves had an incentive to select emails which painted that picture.
If it is (2), then that is classic “destabilize the incumbent” behavior, no matter what other parties attempt to do with the information later.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:36 am
national have been quite successful in spinning the’ stolen emails’ angle/’story’..
thus deflecting attention away from the fact the emails show national to have lied through their teeth to us…
to have conciously planned to tell us whatever we wanted to hear..just to get elected..
(and with more post-election privatising/asset selling secret agendas than you can poke a stick at..
(and we shouldn’t forget..this was just three years ago..
and most of the principal players are still in national…)
i actually think hager was ‘used’..by those anti-brash plotters/leakers..
and was just their pawn..in a much bigger game..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
April 17th, 2008 at 8:41 am
I’m sorry, this remains hilarious. As Flashman points out the evidence clearly points to an inside job, probably involving one or more senior National MPs. No other explanation is plausible.
Really? In all the companies I have worked for, I would have been able to walk away with any data I ever wanted – as the IT guy with the server admin password. Quite frankly that is more plausible than a Senior MP who probably doesnt know two things about sorted their emails.
Police should focus on the IT personnal – that will be the source of any email theft, especially large scale.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:46 am
David – and what if it is 1? You are still ignoring the fact that the damage is not restricted to the incumbent, but applies to the party as a whole and has been used as manufactured ammunition ever since.
Robinsod: Commie
NO U
April 17th, 2008 at 8:51 am
They were stolen, Hager recieved them and profited from a crime. Charge the little prick.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:52 am
I just got on my ‘commie hotline’ to KHelen… I told her that someone on Kiwiblog had just called her a “consummate politician”… she had to take a moment to recover from the flush of excitement that started in her tootsy-toes and radiated all over her helpless quivering body.
April 17th, 2008 at 9:01 am
Tane – so you’ve read Wishart’s book? You know what’s in it? It’s all lies and conspiracy theories?
I suggest you wait until you see it.
April 17th, 2008 at 9:14 am
i ‘d have thought she’d be more excited at being called a ‘commensurate’ politician..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
April 17th, 2008 at 9:17 am
My question would be, given that Hager is the closest thing to a raving commie pinko that we have, WHY WOULD HE GO TO ALL THIS TROUBLE TO PROTECT ANYONE IN THE NATIONAL PARTY?
April 17th, 2008 at 10:28 am
So, if one applies good old Occam’s Razor to the problem it is crystal clear that hard copies of these emails were stolen by someone who had regular access to Dr Brash’s documentary files and a good working knowledge of what was in them and how they were stored.
Occam’s Razor does not support conspiracy theories. Occam’s Razor suggests that the most simplest explanation is the most valid, typically the simplest explanation raises the least amount of questions – for it to be a National Party member would require that member to be willing to hurt the National Party for years after the act!
Why would someone who has joined a Political Party be willing to hurt their own party in this way?
How did they manage to print out without anyone noticing the amount of emails that Hager and Peter’s allege?
How did they walk out with that amount of paper without anyone noticing?
If the person is ‘Happy they got away with it’ according the Hager, then I’d say they are hardly a National supporter, which would suggest in my mind, more of an espionage aspect to this.
At least two damn huge questions that would suggest your theory is not the simplest.
The most likely suspect in the matter of stolen emails would be an IT professional – they know what to do and how to get them without leaving any trace – shit i could do it right now to the Directors of the company I work for and no one would know unless I told them.
Shit I could even make it look like one of the Directors was doing it to hide my tracks.
April 17th, 2008 at 10:52 am
Here’s another goodie from Michael Bassett:
From “Does anyone care about NZ’s economic future?”
“In 1984 the country faced interlocking privileges and subsidies that pointed many peoples’ economic endeavours towards non-productive purposes. Today we seem to be locked into a system of social workers’ interests that defend the indefensible. In 2004 when Don Brash ventured into social problems and asked hard questions about Maori, he was pelted with mud, labeled a racist, and abused by (mostly women) journalists. Plot theorist Nicky Hager wrote a book and gets royalty money from stolen emails. The press, especially the Dominion Post, praised this trade in stolen goods. Several women’s groups chorused that Brash was heartless. It’s certainly true that his first concern was not the poverty industry’s providers. He was trying to work out where, precisely, the fence had broken at the top of the cliff. No matter his good intentions. Women put him ten points behind Helen Clark as their preferred leader. Many of them want New Zealanders to avert their gaze from the underclass. It’s not as though we don’t know the indicators of the collapsed families that form the core of the underclass. One of those indicators is a welfare woman who constantly changes her address and who is in effect a transient. Multiple teenage pregnancies are another indicator of trouble to come. Because of the smothering climate of political correctness, we are unable to focus on what needs to be done with families like Macsyna King’s and Lisa Kuka’s that are currently in the news, where babies were abandoned to thugs and de factos while their mums were drinking.
It’s sad but true: as a system democracy can empower people to defend the indefensible…….”
April 17th, 2008 at 10:54 am
AND ANOTHER ONE from Michael Bassett:
From “The 2008 Electon Prospects”:
“……Controlling the parameters of political debate is something that this government excels at. Helen Clark spends a prodigious amount of time managing public opinion. Her principal acolytes are young, mostly female journalists. Deep down, they regard her as a kindly aunt or big sister, and they happily cooperate, especially when any government critic can be dismissed as politically incorrect. Ministers get away with turning the discourse into playing the man, not the ball. A recent example: when Murray McCully embarked on a footling line against Kordia’s involvement with cell-phone towers in Myanmar, Helen Clark dismissed it by abusing McCully. Another issue: the emigration of skills that has reached serious proportions, is often dismissed as the exit of anti-Labour voters, and therefore a matter of no consequence, or even cause for celebration. Jim Anderton’s early promise to entice them all home has been long forgotten.
On a grand scale, nothing illustrates better this general tactic of playing the man, not the ball, than the brouhaha over the Exclusive Brethren. You will all recall their leaflets at the time of the 2005 election. I am more politically alert than most, but I missed them when delivered, and I had to painstakingly search through my waste-paper bin to find them. They would have had no impact on voters until Labour gave them legs. I analysed the one on the Greens, checking it against their manifesto. I concluded that all but one of the Brethren’s comments were fair. Did any newspaper, radio or TV journalist dissect any of those pamphlets? Not on your Nelly. To their eternal shame, journalists meekly took their lead from the Prime Minister who attacked the pamphlets’ authors, and their religion, never dealing with the issues they had raised. We now seem to inhabit a world where no one can debate things in a manner that Helen Clark doesn’t approve of. I know of three cases recently where bona-fide Labour Party members who have written or said something publicly that the Beehive didn’t like, have received phone calls or emails from ministers telling them to pull their heads in. When someone the government disapproves of appears on something as harmless as National Radio’s Jim Mora Show, Beehive apparatchiks send emails protesting. I’ve seen the messages. Newspaper articles by critics of the government activate a Beehive letter-writing tree. In Auckland Jenny Kirk, her husband Owen, her brother-in-law Jeff Saunders, and at least half a dozen others rush into print with letters to the Herald, the contents of which have a common origin, the Beehive. I possess a Ruth Dyson email urging her supporters to protest about me to the Christchurch Press.
This is a very oppressive government. Peter Fraser fought for freedom of the press, believing always that the interests of workers would be best served by full and free debate. Modern Labour operates in another space. It uses sycophants to confine debate to areas where Labour is more comfortable. Everything else gets ridiculed. Imprisoning ideas is Labour’s cardinal rule, and they have been extremely successful at it. The Electoral Finance Act is just the latest installment.
Nowhere is this oppressiveness more apparent than when someone tries to debate social policy. Sometimes I don’t know whether to laugh or to cry at the huge state resources poured into avoiding the expanding elephant in our room. The collapse of the two-parent household, and of self-reliance, has become a Kiwi tragedy. Radio and TV perpetually carry stories that any sensible person can see indicates that a sizeable chunk of Maori and Polynesian society is collapsing. Labour’s policies propel that collapse with a rocket in the tail. There are parts of Northland, South Auckland, Rotorua and Taupo that are now no-go areas at night. The Domestic Purposes Benefit didn’t cause the breakdown of two parent households, but it gave it a permanent adrenalin rush. However, Labour resists debating the DPB like the devil shuns incense. Journalists like Simon Collins of the Herald produce barmy explanations for family collapse that refuse to get to grips with readily available social statistics……..”
April 17th, 2008 at 11:07 am
Stop taking Hager seriously. He’s a rabid-left conspiracy nutter. GE one day, National the next, tomorrow fluoridation.
The men, women, and others of Labour are clutching at this police failure as though it were a political straw.
And Hager is a straw man being set up by a losing party to divert attention from its imminent demise.
April 17th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Winston said on the news last night that he knew who gave him the documents, but he wouldn’t say who when asked. I clearly remember chuckling at Hagar’s face the morning he found his book couldn’t be released owing to Brash’s injunction. What a pout that boy can muster. If the police want to find who stole the emails, just charge Hagar with recieving. Inside of a day he’ll squeal.
April 17th, 2008 at 11:15 am
I’m not surprised that the kiwiblog right are retailing the mad rantings of Bassett, a man who could fairly be said to be continually at his pique. Particularly apposite on this thread, given his appearance in “The Hollow Men”.
The substitution of rightist rhetoric and mean-minded (and increasingly mysogynist) innuendo for evidence is sad, for someone who once had pretentions of scholarship and wrote a few decent books.
April 17th, 2008 at 11:25 am
jafa
Given that you obviously believe all that is in Hagar’s book will you take the same approach to Wisharts book “absolute power?”
April 17th, 2008 at 11:29 am
whatever jafapete.
I agree with the general thrust of what Basset is saying above. Clark and cohorts are absolutely brilliant at politics. That is absolutely not a positive, in the same way that gangs are brilliant at crime is not a positive.
Politics involves twisting the truth, spinning the truth, being economical with the truth, and of course simple bare-faced lying. This is Clark’s talent. And aren’t we all so much the better for it (insert Tui ad here).
April 17th, 2008 at 11:45 am
bigbruv, I will certainly approach it with an open mind. Did you read Hagar’s book with an open mind?
Given that so much of Hagar’s book was based on real emails and other documents, whether leaked or stolen, and that no-one has been taken to court for defamation, I think we are entitled to rely on the facts presented in the book. In respect of the analysis and inferences made by Hagar, I was able to rely on my own personal knowledge of many of the people involved and the political process in NZ, and found little to argue with. “The Hollow Men”, because of the use of such an unusually rich collection of data, is remarkable for the insight it gives into the best guarded parts of a contemporary political campaign.
vto, I agree that Clark is more competent at managing spin than Brash was. But I would remind you that it was not she who “dogwhistled” at Orewa, a low point surely in our political life, just as deplorable as NZFirst’s hamfisted attempts to appeal to, er, “one nation”-style sentiment.
April 17th, 2008 at 11:50 am
jafa
The way you approach the contents of Haugers book would depend on what side of the fence you sit (politically)
I found NOTHING that I considered inappropriate or concerning, this could not be said about the career of Clark who is a proven liar.
April 17th, 2008 at 11:51 am
David – lets cut to the quick. If the police believe the e-mails were stolen and Hagar received stolen property, then that is a crime. So:
1. Was he asked how he procured them, and asked to name his source?
2. if not, why not?
3. and if he didn’t disclose, why is he not charged with receiving and obstructing the course of justice?
Can you – or any of us – find out the answers to these questions?
and, while you’re at it, was the fellow who hit the protester with a megaphone ever charged? And, if not, why not?
April 17th, 2008 at 11:52 am
.
April 17th, 2008 at 11:55 am
“..Why would someone who has joined a Political Party be willing to hurt their own party in this way?..”
gee bevan..maybe you should start to focus ‘who stood to gain most’ from leaking that material..?
that may help to clear your ‘disbelief’..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
April 17th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
philu, Surely you’re not suggesting that anybody in politics pursues their own self-interest? Never! Hush your mouth!
Stand back, righties, and think. If you can’t understand why a Nat would leak this stuff, maybe it is your understanding that is deficient. I can understand why one of the decent members of the National Party, and there are a few, would find that campaign a source of disquiet. I’m more inclined to think that it was indeed a more traditional Nat who was appalled at the *level* of duplicity involved, than philu’s theory about people who had something to gain. Such a radical secret agenda in prospect, so many outright lies, such a cynical, anything goes approach, all while painting the main stooge as “Honest Don”. Hence the title of the book, I guess.
Bigbruv says that he “found NOTHING that I considered inappropriate or concerning” in the whole sordid story. If you don’t think that a small group of wealthy men using their money and influence to implant a stooge and trying to hoodwink the NZ population into accepting a secret agenda that they would not knowingly buy is unexceptional, then you are never going to get it. You’ll also continue to wonder at why people on my side of the fence are so distrustful and fearful of what your people get up to.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
It all seems sooo last election now… It wasn’t National so it must have been one of their opponents. Dirty stuff, but shows you can’t trust the left.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Oh for fucksake jafapete don’t get so puffy. If you gobbled up the ridiculous leaps of logic and breathless accusations of breaching ideological laws that aren’t even crimes that were wailed by Mr. Hagar, then it’s you who has the understanding problem. I have no idea why Brash resigned. The reason sure wasn’t in Hagar’s book, though he likes to think he’s responsible. All Hagar exposed was Brash’s political infancy, I mean come on, asking MP’s to submit strategy in hard form? What the hell was he thinking? Anyone who says Brash was a threat to NZ politics must have no eyes or ears or political intelligence when it comes to the acts of the Labour Coalition over the past 9 years. They’d necessarily have to living within the confines of an ideology to refuse to see it.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
jafapete, you refer to Brash’s so-called ‘Orewa I’. That was not a dogwhistle. It was not racism. It was raising an issue that was concerning obviously a vast tract of the NZ population. But of course only the left are allowed to discuss race issues – anyone else that discusses race is racist. Which of course is another form of ignorant bigotry in itself. And by way of example I offer up Philu himself – He accused me of being racist for daring to discuss race on this site a wee while ago. Duh.
Why can the so-called left not handle people other than themselves discussing race?
April 17th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
“..I have no idea why Brash resigned..”
um..!..the jig was up..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
April 17th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
I think Mr Hager may be due for a little waterboarding. And I would gladly volunteer my services.
That will wipe the smug look off the litlle arseholes face.
Mess with the good citizens and take you fate Hager.
April 17th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
My morning outburst spun me 10 demerits. FFS tell somebody who cares Hager wimp.If I hadn’t been locked down I would have bombarded everybody in that hollow cess pit play with purple flour bombs.
What a wimpland of lying – bent nitwits.
April 17th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
d4j, have you thought of taking a break on a nice tranquil Pacific Island for a couple of weeks? Seriously, there are some good deals going.
Edit: Oh, you could take gd along with you. He looks like he could do with a break, too.
April 17th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
If you are proud to be a kiwi at present in New Zealand then you are probably one of the 1 million people on anti -depressants you twisted Labour fool jaffapearl.
April 17th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
All this wailing and gnashing of teeth about where the emails came from is a funny thing. You people really are in a bubble, caring so much. The rest of us are just glad that some liars were unmasked, and that we got a fascinating insight into the workings of political parties in contemporary New Zealand…
It all reminds me of when I sued a company, many years ago in capill’s dim distant past. They were telling lies about me in court – but little did they know that I had in my possession a fax that proved beyond all doubt that they were lying – and when I produced it they were rather shocked/stunned/appalled/embarrassed… and they immediately accused me of stealing the fax in question.
Which was true. I had snuck in there and lifted it.
But guess what? The judge didn’t give one. She said to me (I was representing myself) “if you like, mr enema, you can just refer to this paper as ‘found evidence’. Therefore you do not have to disclose where it’s come from”.
To which mr enema said, with a smile: “Good one. OK. I won’t then”.
Same deal here, I believe. It’s ‘found evidence’. The fact that the emails have come to light is SO much more important than the method by which they did so.
April 17th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
What a load of rot capill you know nothing of the justice system and evidence gathering in a CRIMINAL CASE such as this !!
April 17th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Yeah but what ya gonna do?
April 17th, 2008 at 6:34 pm
Simple just unplug the computer and throw it into the offal pit. Not worth the stress when I can’t stick up for a good man Don Brash without coping demerits. Hager is a #### !!!
April 17th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
go on d4j..!..just do it..!
‘unplug ‘etc..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
April 17th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
More on “The Hollow Men” from NZPA: “Don Brash is unhappy with a stage portrayal of his time as National leader which he says makes him look “naive and goofy”.”
Oh to see ourselves as others do.
April 17th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
He wasn’t naive and goofy. He was harassed and hectored, but the lefties who mobbed him are now the ones who are subdued and goofy looking. Mallard for a start. Clark soon.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Jack5, Let me get this right… Brash was harassed and hectored by his political opponents on the other side of the House? Would someone like to help this man out with a lesson in the basics of politics?
“the lefties who mobbed him are now the ones who are subdued and goofy looking.” I guess you’d have a lot of trouble understanding this cartoon in yesterday’s Herlad then…
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/500814/story.cfm?c_id=500814&objectid=10504494
April 17th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
That is a good cartoon mrs jafapete. Sort of encapsulates how obsessed the prime ministre is.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
Dear mrs jaffapetra, is the Liarbour storm tears of sorrow or just plain say it don’t spray it spittle?
April 17th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
Thanks vto, Did you see the previous day’s — The Signs of the Apocalypse, which features the four Labour songbirds? Hilarious.
BTW, Clark always was obsessed. But that might be part of why she’s done so well.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
You mean off course “.. that might be part of why she’s so dangerous.”
April 18th, 2008 at 8:19 am
I see in our morning paper several letters calling Clark and co bullies for the way they try to call Key names. The letters describe the labour govt as disrespectful bullies and as setting a very very bad example for the nations youth etc etc. Basically, the labour govt’s tactic of attacking the messenger is backfiring. They misjudge again the mood of the people.
So surely that is evidence of weaknesses in the labour lots political armoury that can be exploited. Clark’s bullying and name-calling (which is just verbal violence. remember “Its not ok”?). Cullen’s arrogance and spitefulness and nasty meanness. etc etc. Perhaps its time that the past utterances of Clark Cullen et al are brought up to remind the people of NZ what this lot actually think like and how they approach their job / obsession.
April 18th, 2008 at 8:46 am
vto: “I see in our morning paper several letters calling Clark and co bullies for the way they try to call Key names. The letters describe the labour govt as disrespectful bullies and as setting a very very bad example for the nations youth etc etc.”
Yes, smacks of an orchestrated campaign here doesn’t it just! And your sudden leap to “the mood of the people” would do Hannity proud (a favourite line, when raising a new issue himself, being, “The people want to know…).
Come on, do you think we were born yesterday?
April 18th, 2008 at 8:51 am
Oh come on jaffapety this thread is soooooooooooooooooo “yesterday”.
April 18th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
“..[DPF: Only two staff had access to the e-mail, and I agree if it was one of them it is a leak, but there was no way it was either of them, as both were personally very loyal to Brash]..”
so that narrows it down to those who stood to gain most..
at question-time on wednesday..goff accused english of being the leaker..
english just sat with eyes downcast..and didn’t reply to the accusation..
(thanks for ‘airing’ all this again..dpf..
it’s good to remind everyone just before an election that national will say anything/lie through their teeth..to get elected..
and are always brimming with secret agendas..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
April 18th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Pascal makes a good point that New Zealanders are starting to wake up to the fact our managers of government are too often crooks. But then the likes of BoomTownPrat thinks Mr Hager should be written off because his views are narrow and sees “plots: evil private enterprise; unscrupulous banks; lying public relations companies; a sinister SIS”
For those of us who have been around the system for 30 years find it sad people close their eyes to what is actually going on in not just NZ but in many other countries. Our leaders fail us. I attach a letter I just sent to Dr Pita Sharples and it deals with a living example of the times we live in. This letter covers just part of serious issues those in power are trying to hide and hope will go away.
Government is a trust structure for the people but sadly it has become a business to deliver the connected what they want. If Hager has any faults it’s the fact he has not even got down to the real picture, the immunity those who run our country are covered under. Because if you want to find the wall of arrogance you need look no further. They are the very tools cover-ups and hidden agenda use to keep under the radar of the ordinary public. We have serious problems and I fear the ignorance of the average voting kiwi will feel the issues will be dealt with by voting for another team to manage the show.
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 2:45 PM
Subject: Matakana Island
Tena koe Dr Pita Sharples
Thank you for your letter dated 10 March together with the attached letter of Attorney General Dr Cullen dated 7 February 2008.
Dr Cullen’s letter states, the legal matters have been fully considered by the Courts. This is something the Attorney-General’s office has been saying for sometime. But they miss the point of my complaint each time. My complaint is the Courts knowingly and intentionally changed various facts that cost Arklow its legal rights. Put simply, the Courts wrote a judgement that was wrong and is a fiction. I understand they did this to allow the Maori defendants to keep the Matakana land. I cannot find any law that allows judges to do this. Clearly they have failed their duty of care. In both the Court of Appeal and Privy Council the point was made by the defence that maybe the bank erred in their duty to Wingate Arklow, but the overriding and important point was the sacred land was now in the ownership of the traditional land owners.
I note with interest what Lord Cooke said in his Harkness Henry speech to fellow judges. He said that the wrongs committed by the Waitangi breaches need not only legislative assistance to correct but that is was up to the judges to do all they can to correct past wrongs. My point and my complaint is that Arklow has been a victim of that policy. Can you please address this issue with Dr Cullen. The main question is; Is it acceptable to the Government for judges to change findings of fact and are the judges obligated to a degree of accuracy when writing their judgments.
The other point I raised with you was seeking to know how in law can the leaders of Ngaiterangi iwi be leaders of the Tauranga Maori community, then when they obtain a business benefit for the people they represent, they ignore their fiduciary duty and take the gain for themselves. That would be like the Prime Minister and the cabinet setting up private companies to take advantage of crown business at the loss for the people who trust them the leadership role. In any area of law, those type of conflicts are not allowed. Can you please address this issue and provide me with the solution. As you would know the people of Tauranga are outraged asking how this could happen. If you require more information please let me know and I will help.
As for the death inquiry of Sonny Tawhiao, the INDEPENDENT POLICE CONDUCT AUTHORITY are looking into the original police inquiry. But again, I find a complete fiduciary failure with getting any government assistance with complaints. I write to the Government complaining about faults in the Crown system, and I seek help, but they ignore the wrong-doing and they ignore my complaint. That behavior is something they have done to Maori for more than 100 years but it appears they now do it to the rest of the citizens. Maori are not the only victims of Crown mistakes. I appreciate more than most what it has cost Maori. But it has cost me and my family our lovely home of 20 years, our income, and my belief in the quality of our Crown system of government.
Heoi ano
Christopher Wingate
Background from http://courtsofappeal.blogspot.com/