The mails that changed a nation

Friday, March 12th, 2010 at 4:09 pm

I take what is probably a final look at the Hollow Men e-mails in NBR 24/7 this week:

The illegal (and it was almost certainly illegal) obtaining of the e-mails, and their subsequent publication, had a major impact on New Zealand politics. They effectively forced Don Brash out of the leadership of the National Party, despite the fact National was ahead of Labour in the polls at the time.

It is very unusual for an Opposition Leader to resign, when his party is leading in the polls. And the Hager book based on the e-mails did not in fact have any smoking guns. However, Brash correctly judged that he would have been unable to make traction in the face of the book, and resigned.

If Brash had not resigned, it is quite possible National, under his leadership, would have gone on to win the 2008 general election, and while it is conjecture what policies a Brash-led government would have had, suffice to say that it is hard to imagine it being happy to borrow $240 million a week to fund interest free student loans and working for families.

And the usual conjecture on how they were obtained.

Tags: , , , ,

Police National HQ and the Brash E-mails

Wednesday, October 1st, 2008 at 1:00 pm

Matthew Hooton blogs some disturbing information he has obtained from the Police. It has taken him 18 months to get the information under the Official Information Act, even though it should have taken only 20 days.

It deals with the Police investigation into the Brash or so called Hollow Men e-mails. Key points are:

  • The alleged theft was notified to Police in August 2005
  • The Police did not begin their investigation until September 2006 – 13 months later!
  • The Police did not interview anyone as part of the investigation until June 2007 – 22 months after the complaint
  • The Police lied when they said in April 2008 the file was closed, as they now claim it is open but not active.
  • It took 18 months to get even this information out of the Police
  • The Police are refusing to release the file, even though they say the file is no longer active
  • The Officer in charge is the same Officer who decided not to prosecute Labour for their $800.000 of over spending in 2005

Now some will say there is nothing bad or sinister about this. They will claim the e-mails were never stolen. But why did the Police spend 20 months fighting the OIA release?

Tags: , , , ,

The hollowness of the Hollow Men

Friday, July 25th, 2008 at 8:00 am

This is a long detailed post. Half of me says I shouldn’t bother doing this, but I think it would be useful for the record to illustrate that the very deceptive practices that Nicky Hager condemns in The Hollow Men, are in fact used by Hager in The Hollow Men.

The material I am going to focus on has been used by Nicky Hager in the Hollow Men, and has featured in the play and in the just-released film.

If you attended the Wellington premiere of the Hollow Men last weekend will have been given a flyer for the film. On the front page it features a quote from what is said to be an email from Peter Keenan to Don Brash. The line is: “Political war is about evoking emotions that favour one’s goals….while mobilizing passions of fear and resentment against your opponents.”

That rather nasty quote, along with others in the book, is used to introduce the alleged malicious intent behind the Orewa speech on Treaty issues. Hager would have you think Keenan was telling Brash that this is how he should operate and in Hager’s book (refer bottom of p85) this line is presented as Keenan “quoting with approval United States Republican strategist David Horowitz”.

But, as with pretty much everything in the Hollow Men, Hager stripped out the context of the quote to distort the meaning. In fact in this case he manages to reverse the meaning entirely.

What Hager failed to mention was that those words were actually from a six page bullet point summary, sent as an attachment in an email, of essays in two books by David Horowitz. The attached document was a straightforward summary of what somebody else had written. Those that want to check what follows can simply get the books: The Art of Political War and other Radical Pursuits, and How to Beat the Democrats, and other Subversive Ideas. They are interesting essays, regardless of what your political views might be.

The so-called quotes from Peter Keenan, are actually direct quotes from the summary he compiled of the Horowitz articles. This was not an instruction or advice from Keenan to Brash on what Brash should do, but part of a six page book summary.

It turns out that, in the articles summarized by Keenan, Horowitz was describing how the political left conduct their political battles, and pointing out how hopeless the political right is by comparison. He is reminding conservative politicians that they need to engage at an emotional level if they want to be as effective politically as the left. The quotes attributed to Keenan are in fact Horowitz describing how those on the left operate.

Here are a few more quotes from that bullet point summary to give you the flavour of what it was about. Hager didn’t use these. To put this in an NZ context, I have substituted “the left/left-wing” for Democrats, and “conservative” for Republican.

“The right often seem to regard political combat as they would a debate at the Oxford Union, as though winning depended on rational arguments. The audience is not made up of academics. You have 30 seconds to make a point. Even if you had time to make an argument, the audience in the middle (the ones you need to reach) are not paying attention or would not get it.”

“The left come to party politics out of socialist organisations, trade unions, and an assortment of social crusades (abortion, racial grievances, and environmental concerns). They are combat-ready before they begin their political careers. Conservatives train in boy scout troops and graduate to chambers of commerce and rotary clubs. Except for the pro-life missionaries in the conservative coalition, Conservatives are innocents abroad when it comes to political war.”

The so-called Keenan “quotes” that have been referenced in the Hollow Men book, play and film, are drawn from a section which summarises what Horowitz calls the Four Principles of Politics: ie. politics is a war of Emotions, of Position, is about Fear, is about Hope. Hager pulls quotes from the summary explanations of these points. I will give you the full quote (which was itself a summary of a fuller treatment by Horowitz in his book), and highlight what Hager used:

Politics is a War of Emotions: For the great mass of the public, casting a vote is not an intellectual choice, but a gut decision, based on impressions that may be superficial and premises that could be misguided. Political war is about evoking emotions that favour one’s goals. It is the ability to manipulate the public’s feelings in support of your agenda, while mobilising passions of fear and resentment against your opponent.

Politics is about Fear: You must not only convince a majority that you are their friend, you must get them to fear your opponent as their enemy. Anger, fear and resentment are the most potent weapons in the Left-wing arsenal. They are powerful emotions that drive voters to the polls, and if they are not countered these emotions will bury your Gold Stars every time.

Horowitz used the term “Gold Star Republican” to describe the typical managerial type of conservative who thinks he can have a calm, rational debate on policy and win the day.

Thus, by stripping all the context from this “quote”, Hager completely misrepresents Keenan.

If you look at the e-mail in context, the obvious and reasonable interpretation of all of this was that Keenan was warning Brash what he was up against, and encouraging him to try and connect emotionally with the audience, use less technocratic language, and so forth. In the fuller treatment in the book, regarding the politics of fear, Horowitz writes:

“No matter how much conservatives may deplore such tactics, no matter how fervently they wish that electoral contests would turn on good policies and good principles, it is not in their power to change the reality of political war”.

Lets finish here with another couple of bullet points from that summary document, quotes that Hager could have used, but for obvious reasons did not.

“The left rely on Bribery and Fear. Much of the electorate has an enthusiasm for big government. Voters look to government for entitlements, looking to the political left to supply them. And the left recruits its supporters through taxpayer-funded programmes that buy their votes. The obstacles to this tendency is the individualism of the culture, the bankruptcy of most of the left’s programmes (poor incentives, no allowance for individual responsibility), and the political right itself which is infused with middle-class energy and entrepreneurial values and collectively represents the politics of reform.”

“Marxism may be dead, but a Marxist morality play provides the ordnance for left-wing political attacks…..In political battle the political left provides the search and destroy teams that accuse the right of racism and sexism, of polluting the environment and of abusing old people, women and children. The passions that motivate the political left are self-righteousness and hate.”

Looking back at the Labour Party’s 2005 campaign, and the way Hager has operated here, this analysis looks rather perceptive.

What is clear from all this, is that the use of that quote in the flyer for the film, and in the book, and in the play, was shamefully dishonest. Hager in his book, Dean Parker in the play, and Alister Barry in the film, all feature this astoundingly dishonest so-called “quote” – deliberately out of context and misapplied – to cast a malicious light on some simple briefing material forwarded to Brash.

Hager and Barry, if they wish to display the integrity they claim to champion, should order the current flyer to be shredded, and the film reworked to be at least marginally more honest.

Although integrity seems to be in short supply here. Some centre left bloggers have noted with disapproval that the film uses some covert filming of Peter Keenan. Grant Robertson said:

The only bum note in the documentary for me was the use of what appeared to be covert filming of Brash’s speech writer Peter Keenan.  Shots of him opening his curtains in the morning, and reading the paper just felt a bit creepy to me.

I am yet to see it, but when I heard about it, creepy is indeed the word for it.

And Danyl at the Dim-Post:

Even more ill-conceived are the other shots of Peter Keenan. One of the most interesting characters in Hager’s book the former economist privately disagreed with his leader’s racial policies even while he was writing the speeches promoting them. Keenan’s emails are quoted extensively in the film over shots of him wandering around inside his home watering his plants and reading the newspaper. The footage is hand-held and appears to have been shot covertly from a distance; Keenan does not seem to know he is being filmed and these sequences all have a queasy, paparazzi-cum-stalker like quality to them. Instead of questioning Kennan’s ethics as a speech-writer I found myself doubting Barry’s ethics as a director.

Danyl also noted:

As with his previous films, Barry makes extensive use of archival footage accompanied by voice-over narration; various experts including political scientist Jon Johansson and Christchurch Press political editor Colin Espiner provide additional commentary (although Espiner agreed to be interviewed by Barry he was not told it was for The Hollow Men).

Stephen Stratford at NZBC comments:

Why on earth would Barry not have told Espiner the purpose of the interview? And having interviewed Espiner, why did he not interview Keenan instead of stalking him in this, frankly, creepy way?

If you won’t front up to your subject and talk to him, you shouldn’t pretend that what you do is journalism. And if you don’t tell someone whom you do talk to what the real purpose of the interview is, you are engaged in deception. Isn’t that what The Hollow Men was all about?

The irony is rich isn’t it? A deceptive book and a deceptive film that take the moral high ground to lecture on deception?

Finally let’s finish on a lighter note. The flyer to the film also features a quote from a Keenan email to Brash, this time a genuine one. It is “the secret of success is sincerity and conviction…once you can fake that you’ve got it made”. That quote is so obviously Peter winding Don up, with a joke that reworks a well-known line by Groucho Marx, that it is amazing Nicky Hager didn’t get it. So Hager quotes a Groucho Marx joke as if it was serious political advice.

Hager, Parker and Barry need to get out more. Those on different sides of politics hold different views about which policies will build a better nation. When you start assuming that people who hold different views from you are in some way evil, then what you need is to get counseling – not write a book, play or make a film. But hey when the Government will give you money to do so, one can understand some of the motivations.

Now this all raises a wider question: given the scale of misrepresentation in this instance, it is impossible to take anything else in this book at face value. If you can make something sinister out of material like this, you can do it with anything. Removal of context is the simplest way to deceive.And unlike blogs where you can link through to the full quote, Hager’s works leave you blind as to the context.

Hager subtitled his book, A Study in the Politics of Deception. It was indeed – but maybe not in the way he intended.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Is the Hollow Men play illegal?

Friday, April 18th, 2008 at 9:07 am

Stephen Franks has raised the issue of the Hollow Men play with the Electoral Commission. Nicky Hager was a strong supporter of the Electoral Finance Act, so it would be very ironic if the play based on his book was shut down as it is now an illegal election advertisement.

Let us look at how it may be an advertisement. First take s5(1)(a)(i)

election advertisement means any form of words or graphics, or both, that can reasonably be regarded as … encouraging or persuading voters to vote, or not to vote, for 1 or more specified parties…

Now a play is a form of words and The Hollow Men certainly encourages people not to vote for National. So is it exempt? What are the seven exemptions in s5(2)?

  1. electoral agency advertisements
  2. editorial material in a periodical
  3. radio or television programmes
  4. media Internet sites
  5. books
  6. documents published to members or shareholders
  7. blogs

So we have established that The Hollow Men play is almost certainly an election advertisement, and is not covered by any exemption. Next we ask is it “published” as defined in s4(1)?

publish, in relation to an advertisement, means to—

(a) print or insert in a periodical published or distributed in New Zealand; or
(b) issue, hand out, or display, to the public; or
(c) send to any member of the public by any means; or
(d) deliver to any member of the public, or leave at a place owned or occupied by a member of the public; or
(e) broadcast (for example, in the form of a radio or television broadcast); or
(f) include in a film or video displayed to the public; or
(g) disseminate to the public by means of the Internet or any other electronic medium; or
(h) store electronically in a way that is accessible to the public

We can rule out (a), (c), (g) and (h). But Stephen makes the case that a play can be considered to be displayed to the public, or delivered to any member of the public. Also if a PA system was used it could be caught up by (e) and if a promo clip for the play is put on You Tube, then that may breach (f).

One can’t say for sure that the Hollow Men play would or would not be illegal, but it shows how far reaching the law is.  It may escape the law only because it does not fit the definition of publish, even though it is defined as an election advertisement.

Now Nicky Hager should be very grateful to the anti-EFA lobbyists that we kicked up such a fuss about the select committee version of the EFB, that they deleted this clause in the definition for publish:

(i) bring to the notice of the public in any other manner

This was the infamous megaphone clause which the select committee added in. It got removed after protests.  But if that clause had remained in, then the case for The Hollow Men play being closed down by the Electoral Finance Act would have been greatly strengthened.

Tags: , , ,

Hager’s spin

Thursday, April 17th, 2008 at 6:21 am

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.

Tags: , , , ,

E-mail Thieves got away with it

Wednesday, April 16th, 2008 at 6:39 pm

NZPA reports:

Police have given up hunt for the person behind the theft of former National Party leader Don Brash’s emails.

An investigation into the theft had closed, Wellington police district crime services manager Detective Inspector Harry Quinn said.

It had not identified those responsible.

“How the thefts occurred still largely remains a mystery,” Mr Quinn said.

“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.”

The investigation established that emails created between October 2003 and November 2005 had been stolen from the ownership of Dr Brash, but found no evidence of thefts since November 2005.

Mr Quinn would not speculate on how he thought the emails had been taken from Dr Brash.

“There are strong indications that the emails 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,” he said.

Police interviewed parliamentary computer staff, parliamentary security staff, cleaners, Dr Brash’s staff, politicians, journalists and friends of Dr Brash.

“Many of them had their own theories on who was responsible and why the thefts had occurred,” said Mr Quinn.

“But in the end no firm evidence pointing to a potential perpetrator was uncovered. The file is closed until someone comes forward with some compelling evidence.”

Interesting that they think printed e-mails were stolen, rather than an electronic copy. If so then that is beyond doubt a criminal act.

Tags: , , ,