Hard News: Never mind the quality ...
319 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 13 Newer→ Last
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
His boss, Stephen Franks, was hilarious today. He kept saying that he’d been away skiing and missed it all, so he might as well just pass on the whole thing.
Translation: "So what if Rome is on fire? Time to break out the lyre!"
-
Sacha, in reply to
still framing it around Judith Collins
always all about Judy
-
Stewart, in reply to
always all about Judy
But there's no show without Punch!
-
Sacha, in reply to
ooof
-
Pete George, in reply to
Sorry if I’ve missed it Pete, but have you at any point devoted any of your unending outrage towards the actual hideous content of that rape conversation? Or expressed sympathy for the young women being targeted by these creeps?
I've addressed that particular issue extensively over time Russell, often being attacked for it. In fact I was banned from Whale Oil for going and confronting their attitude to rape and Tania Billingsley. This is what I posted there:
http://yournz.org/2014/07/12/why-theres-anger-murray/How often have you gone and stood up to them Russell?
-
Pete George, in reply to
Plus, you know, we actually have the messages exchanged between Lusk and Slater about the Hide blackmail, and no-one is disputing their veracity. So either they were lying to each other, or…
That shows that they discussed doing it, nothing more. Hide has said it didn't happen and there are no facts to indicate that it did actually happen is there?
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
That shows that they discussed doing it, nothing more. Hide has said it didn’t happen and there are no facts to indicate that it did actually happen is there?
Well, there's the very thinly-veiled threat about Hide's personal life, posted on Whaleoil exactly as promised in the hacked messages.
But you do realise, Pete, that conspiracy to commit blackmail is quite a serious criminal offence? Surely you realise that.
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
That shows that they discussed doing it, nothing more. Hide has said it didn't happen and there are no facts to indicate that it did actually happen is there?
The book makes pretty careful claims based on the documents it has. Hide would have pretty strong motivations to deny something that it actually happened - but it doesn't matter, insofar as Hager's claims (Lusk and Slater discussed blackmailing Hide, Lusk said he was going to do it, Lusk reported back he had done it, Hide resigned) are all things that actually happened.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
I’ve addressed that particular issue extensively over time Russell, often being attacked for it. In fact I was banned from Whale Oil for going and confronting their attitude to rape and Tania Billingsley. This is what I posted there:
So, no, you have at no point addressed the substance of that passage in the book – that these creeps were essentially plotting the rape of young women who were members of the National Party – but you’ve gone on and on and on about the peripheral issue of who organised the party they were going to. I think we’re done.
-
With all these increasingly absurd denials from Key and Malcolm Tucker this week, I'm starting to wonder if Phil Goff was ever actually briefed, as he originally claimed. All we've got is a note on a briefing paper which could easily be faked for a bit of embarrassment.
It also amuses me that this weird issue of Israeli spies escaping NZ after the earthquake can have an effect on two successive elections: once for the blue team and once for the red team.
-
SteveH, in reply to
Rodney Hide has emphatically disputed what Hager said about him being blackmailed.
Are you for real?
Hager said in the book, and Hide quoted it in the story, that there was no evidence that Hide had actually been blackmailed. He presented evidence that there was a conversation about blackmailing Hide, that is all.
Stop treating us as idiots. We will check the links you post so if they don't actually support your argument don't bother. Seriously.
-
Pete George, in reply to
I can't see anything in the book or the dumps that says all that.
Hager wrote "The documents do not contain the texts and we do not know they exist. There is also no evidence that a direct threat was made to Hide".
I remember the Whale Oil posts but there is no evidence that Hide read them. At a time that he was fighting for his political career it's possible he didn't spend time reading blogs.
I don't see where Lusk says he had "done it".
This is one of a number of examples where Hager has fitted some communications with a story but says "there were of course various political pressures on Hide".
There is no evidence that I've seen of what prompted Hide to resign. I think there's far more chance it was due to conversations within the ACT Party.
-
Pete George, in reply to
FFS Russell, no I haven't addressed all the issues raised in the book. Have you?
but you’ve on and on and one about the peripheral issue of who organised the party they were going to
I don't believe I've done that at all.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
This copy of the audio was retrieved by one of my Twitter followers because it’s been deleted by Radio Live. No wonder.
I do love the interwebs!
-
nzlemming, in reply to
That shows that they discussed doing it, nothing more. Hide has said it didn’t happen and there are no facts to indicate that it did actually happen is there?
And, if you'd read the book, you'd know that Hager didn't say they blackmailed Hide but that they discussed doing it and planned for it. And noted that Hide resigned at about the same time as this is recorded as occurring.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
I think we’re done.
I think we are. It's not often I recommend dumping someone from PAS but does Pete George really add any value to the discussions?
-
izogi, in reply to
And, if you’d read the book, you’d know that Hager didn’t say they blackmailed Hide but that they discussed doing it and planned for it.
Which, as Danyl also pointed out, would count as Conspiring to Commit an Offence, punishible by a maximum of 7 years in jail. And if police in the course of their investigation, came across evidence that these people actually did go ahead and blackmail Mr Hide, it becomes a maximum of 14 years in jail.
-
Pete George, in reply to
And, if you’d read the book
And if you read what I said you would have seen that I have read it, and the data dump, and that I said much the same as you said, and SteveH said.
It seems like you both are jumping to diss before you think.
It’s not often I recommend dumping someone from PAS but does Pete George really add any value to the discussions?
I guess it depends on what you value in your discussions. But that's a pretty sad (albeit not unusual) sort of comment for a political forum.
-
Rich Lock, in reply to
I’ve addressed that particular issue extensively over time Russell, often being attacked for it. In fact I was banned from Whale Oil for going and confronting their attitude to rape and Tania Billingsley. This is what I posted there:http://yournz.org/2014/07/12/why-theres-anger-murray/How often have you gone and stood up to them Russell?
So they way to deal with these people is to go to their website and post comments until you're banned? Righto.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
I guess it depends on what you value in your discussions. But that’s a pretty sad (albeit not unusual) sort of comment for a political forum.
I'm sure it's one you're used to seeing.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
I think we are. It's not often I recommend dumping someone from PAS but does Pete George really add any value to the discussions?
I could always dust off my visual Swiftian salute. ;D
-
Joe Wylie, in reply to
I could always dust off my visual Swiftian salute. ;D
If you want to provoke the longest exit since Rasputin. ;D
-
Sacha, in reply to
We will check the links you post so if they don't actually support your argument don't bother.
'hey it worked on other blogs'
-
Sacha, in reply to
does Pete George really add any value
beige blanket
-
Re. Mr George:
Not everyone's cup of tea and offensive to some, but this reads like bullying to me. I see him as somehow earnest and wanting to engage others to consider his views. It's almost brave on some level, knowing it's a tough crowd.
It's a fine line on who's being dirty sometimes.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.