a Harvey Keitel in Pulp Fiction type of cleaner?
If the Nats try this defence then KDC may have something to say about the things he is accused of...
This pinhead's getting a bit small eh.
I was particularly impressed by The Paul Henry Show's choice of speed-reading reviewer... A lobbyist. An excellent choice for an impartial review...
” 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.”
Jesus fucking Christ, is Hagar expecting a medal made out of warm cookie dough? He was perfectly happy to receive "a considerable amount of very personal information" and, sorry, I just don't believe he was the only person who read it. If you're going to shit on people's privacy, just cut the flesh-crawling sanctimony and get on with it.
All that is required is that the access was done ‘knowing that he or she is not authorised’.
I expect it is more complicated than that. Showing access won't be enough. You would also need to show the mens rea, the guilty mind. This would be a lot more difficult than just showing some server logs. And how do you show that someone knows they are not authorised to view something.
I'm pretty much of the opinion that I'm authorised to see anything easily accessible on the internet. I think you'd struggle to convince a court otherwise.
And how do you show that someone knows they are not authorised to view something.
Assuming there was supposed to be a question mark after that sentence, you quote what they said about it afterwards.
Yup, Paul Henry's "speedreader" was recently appointed by Steven Joyce to chair the Board of Education, and he's a Director of NZTE.
That Paul Henry utterly failed to mention anything other than Charles Finny's speed reading qualifications, when Finny went on to say that the book would "not change one vote" was quite something.
here's finny's profile on LinkedIn
Jesus fucking Christ, is Hagar expecting a medal made out of warm cookie dough? He was perfectly happy to receive “a considerable amount of very personal information” and, sorry, I just don’t believe he was the only person who read it. If you’re going to shit on people’s privacy, just cut the flesh-crawling sanctimony and get on with it.
Well, why not!? I’m sure that the personal information he received would be sufficient to destroy a number of people and yet UNLIKE Slater & his mates in Cabinet, he’s not plotting how best to use it but rather treating it ethically and disposing it. You’re protesting too loud, mate.
A first run through finished at 11-15pm. Footnotes are a good read too!!
Crusher will be a wee bit concerned.
It was fascinating to read of the internal factions skulling it out in the selection processes. I fear I must be quite naive to think that this shit only happens on the left. Even more fascinated that the MSM have a field day ripping the left factions apart and manage to leave the right completely untouched.
I am no longer naive.
But the corporate shenanigans make frightful reading. Although when these groups made their views heard a few alarm bells did sound in the tiny brain. The small NZ assoc of convenience stores was a cracker! The anti breast feeders was shocking.
Henry tonight was right into the leak and forget about the message. TV1 jaw boner was into the fight likening Hagars tactics to be the same as what he was writing about!!
Farrar responding with Rule 1,2 and 3: Deny Deny Deny.
PM. (nay his spokesman) says: “Most people know that Nicky Hager is a screaming left-wing conspiracy theorist.”
So we watch this space…..
And oh...fancy that...Slater just happens to be "out of the country"......
And oh…fancy that…Slater just happens to be “out of the country"……
In Korea. Or is it Israel?
In Korea. Or is it Israel?
Yeah, that's bloody weird. In his initial post about the book he definitely said he'd just arrived in Israel. Now it reads Korea.
It seems hard to confuse the two - could it have been some sort of crazy Autocorrect freakout if he was writing on his cellphone?
Any law that requires a judge to decide how hard it was to hack a system in order to decide if it was illegal is probably fatally flawed - "oh that one was easy, it must be legal, that one was hard you did wrong. "
The law as written is written well - really it's the taking that's illegal, and the problem not so much the actual how you took it. If I leave my front door wide open and you come and take my TV it's still theft.
Rifling through the Labour party's computer was obviously illegal, even if it was easy (I don't think any of us think Slater has mad hakr skillz - apparently he doesn't know how to secure his own stuff).
But equally the people who took his emails also did something illegal too - the fact that they did this doesn't make Slater's behaviour any less illegal.
More interesting is "is it legal for Nicky Hagar to publish this stuff?" a great question - there's an obvious public interest in the existence of a crime being published - if he'd just turned the evidence over to the cops I guess it would be OK, would they have understood what it meant without his exposition?
Hagar made a great point on TV tonight - essentially his lawyer seems to think he's on safe solid ground because it's largely against the best interests of the people he's exposed to go to court and have everything exposed - which I assume means there's more stuff in the emails he wasn't comfortable publishing but would come out if they ever hit the court
In olden days a hint of hacking
Was looked on as something shocking
But now, Heaven knows,
Hah, I was just going to post the same:
NO "king hit" in the book, nothing much worth taking note of, and it would not change one vote in the coming election, Mr Charles Finny commented.
Paul Henry does of course always choose "independent" and "neutral" experts and commenters to appear on his show, does he not???
From the 'Saunders Unsworth' (Government Relations Consultants) website:
"Charles joined the team at Saunders Unsworth in 2010 after five and half years as CEO of the Wellington Regional Chamber of Commerce. Prior to that Charles had a wide range of experience in government working for the Prime Ministers Department, Department of Trade and Industry and Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. His particular areas of expertise are China, US politics and trade policy, Australia, Asia and international trade."
Maybe Nicky Hager can start right away on the next book, called "Dirty Media", I may suggest?!
Clearly if you're a National party member or employee accessing confidential Labour Party data, that' a criminal act because you know you're not meant to be in there. End of.
Cleaners on midnight till 6am.
Further to my comment above, re Charles Finny, he was also chief negotiator for the NZ China FTA (2004 to 2005), so when we discuss sales of land to Mainland Chinese companies and investors, perhaps remember what was also the result of those negotiations:
Look at articles 138 and 139 perhaps.
Mr Finny as a supposed impartial "speed reader" and reviewer of Hagar's book on the Paul Henry Show last night must really be very "expert" and qualified for giving such book reviews.
The politically right leaning spin masters are already working overtime to discredit Hagar's book!
Picking Finney as their speed reader was just insane really. I mean his entire livelihood is dependent on maintaining a good relationship with government - his interest could hardly be more conflicted unless he were actually named in the book.
unless he were actually named in the book.
* checks index *
Oh yay, theft analogies.
How about if the person makes a duplicate of whatever he finds and leaves the original behind?
In which case it's not theft, but infringement, at least that's what copyright law stipulates.
Cleaners on midnight till 6am.
Because all that leaking Whale Oil is going rancid.
There's so much dirt in there, it's overwhelming. I am eagerly anticipating many direct probing questions of our PM over the coming weeks.
Beyond that, Hagar's conclusion is brilliant - an acknowledgement that our 4th estate has simply failed to hold the powerful to account. His solution is funded public broadcasting and political parties.
Watching Mike Hosking's "nothing to see here" at 7pm on our state broadcaster just underlines how dire things are - a partisan hocking light-ent masquerading as current affairs. Seven Sharp has even promoted Slater with Heather DPA's long colour piece on Slater. She simply failed to provide any sort of useful function beyond building the Slater brand and misinforming voters about our democracy.
And this, the flagship primetime show on our state broadcaster.
Brighter future, everyone.
You’re protesting too loud, mate.
And you're tone policing -- cut it out. R.S. Surtees is at least a hundred years out of fashion, but he was onto something when he said the man who is always talking about being a gentleman never is one.
It may in part be a way of saying "don't come after my people, blubber boy."
I was particularly impressed by The Paul Henry Show’s choice of speed-reading reviewer… A lobbyist. An excellent choice for an impartial review…
Charles Finny? Seriously?