Speaker: On the upland road
76 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
His name is Hager
- please direct your vitriol at the right target, if you wish your views to be found easily in the public record... -
Russell Brown, in reply to
Which can only be taken as a threat.
This isn’t to deny the clear ethical problems displayed by Slater and DPF. But I’m not sure that a government crackdown on what has become a vital democratic forum is tha answer here.
What the Law Commission proposed was voluntary for bloggers. I'd be okay with it.
-
izogi, in reply to
So many people I know on all sides of the spectrum have gone beyond angry and they’re just tired of it all now.
I’m tired of it, too. I’d rather be considering other things, but I don’t think that makes it acceptable as a consequence. It’s more like an unpleasant thing which remains critically important for NZ’s future and still requires dealing with.
What do you propose we do? Ignore it because people are tired of it? Leave it up to politicians to decide how to improve their own conduct?
-
Sacha, in reply to
I think there’s a lot of stinky stuff on all sides
Feel free to provide examples to back up your reckons.
There is some glorious hair splitting in “leaking” not being “theft”.
The legal position on what counts as a defence was outlined clearly hereabouts by law professor Nicole Moreham.
-
Dismal Soyanz, in reply to
Recycling of long since addressed and discounted arguments adds nothing to the debate. Seriously, you come across as a stooge.
-
Rob Stowell, in reply to
Seriously, you come across as a stooge.
BigPharmaChick - Carrick Graham in a chicken suit?
-
Sacha, in reply to
long since addressed and discounted arguments
Not everybody will be on the same page.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Seriously, you come across as a stooge.
BigPharmaChick – Carrick Graham in a chicken suit?
No. Pharmachick has an occasional commenting history and I'm pretty sure she's commenting in good faith. Let's disagree with each other rather than make accusations.
-
On one side, you have a government that helps its mates to avoid justice for stealing money from old people.
On the other, you have investigative journalism.
If you can't see the difference.
-
Rob Stowell, in reply to
Let’s disagree with each other rather than make accusations.
Sorry Pharmachick. Not an accusation, just a stupid attempt at humour.
-
Dismal Soyanz, in reply to
I guess. Although when the writing on the page is 48 pt font and double spaced, you wonder whether they can read at all.
Or maybe just not bothering to read.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
Leave it to the professionals...
...just a stupid attempt at humour.
You wanna be more Prime Ministerial, mate,
<nudge> he gets all the (hollow) laughs!;- )
-
Hi to all,
rather than a huge number of posts I'll send a general one.
Firstly, I did not make an argument that this is about how much Mr Hager makes (oops, I'm also very sorry about the perpetuated spelling mistake of his last name). My argument was that a section of the Crimes Act specifically states that penalties change at 30K proceeds - so yes, I hope he has pod legal advice. I actually wish him every good luck in making money as an author, because its hard to do - particularly in the NZ marketplace. I certainly have no $ envy for that. I am, however; sincerely unsure that Mr Hager has the moral high ground in receiving hacked/stolen e-mails etc. I just don't like the idea of criminal acts precipitating debate (yes, I now call me naive, and yes… I'm also aware of Watergate etc, I just don't want to see my country going down that road - although it maybe too late).
Secondly, I believe that some of this is *very* relevant. Such as the attempt to discredit the SFO etc. Wow, just wow and probably unbecoming. But IMHO details of who talks to whom over private e-mail, including the inevitable bragging about "take downs" or "gunning for" needs to be taken with a grain of salt. It sounds like a political equivalent of Rugby Club talk after a few ;-)
Yes, again - you have pointed out that I was incorrect … its not every three years. But I *do* wonder why Mr. Hager does this consistently just before an election (when he does it). Argument pro: precise timing, most relevant, protects the public. Argument con: publicity seeking and [maybe] a bit self-aggrandising as "defender of the public" [self appointed]. Truly I dunno, but also truthfully, I lean to the latter (with a healthy dose of the former).
Also, I don't think I'd look great in one of those giant chicken suits - being only 5' tall - although I'm sure you'd get a good laugh Rob =D
-
Dismal Soyanz, in reply to
But IMHO details of who talks to whom over private e-mail, including the inevitable bragging about “take downs” or “gunning for” needs to be taken with a grain of salt. It sounds like a political equivalent of Rugby Club talk after a few ;-)
If it was only private emails between private (i.e. non-government) individuals then, yes. But it wasn't. In the context of the smears on Slater's blog and the positions of the participants such as Ede and Collins, this is no longer about expressing an opinion privately.
-
Pharmachick, in reply to
I was, and am, outraged.
I thought that Kim Dotcom deserved far better than having his privacy egregiously invaded by NZ police acting as stooges for the FBI. Who BTW, are supposedly an INTERNAL agency in the US (the external one is the CIA, and don't get me started - I lived in the US for ~13 years until relatively recently). And don't get me started about an Armed Offenders Squad call out (for all intents and purposes) in a house with the many young children and women in it. Utterly disgraceful.
All this being said, I also have some grave concerns about Mr. Dotcom's role in our electoral process this election.
-
simon g, in reply to
Personally I'd be pleased if Dotcom cancelled his 'Big reveal' on Sept 15, and kept quiet until the election. A backlash against him is probably Key's last best hope.
I fear his ego is bigger than his strategic smarts.
-
Rob Stowell, in reply to
I am, however; sincerely unsure that Mr Hager has the moral high ground in receiving hacked/stolen e-mails etc. I just don’t like the idea of criminal acts precipitating debate
I feel the public good argument is clear enough. But it tends not to work on people who say 'I won't listen to this, because it comes from hacked emails' - and thus can't make an informed judgement.
I haven't heard it seriously contended that not reporting the emails would have been the best course of action. Is that the argument you're making? Ironically, it would mean no one knowing about a range of other hacking and stealing (and possibly illegally leaking) information for narrow political purposes. Eyes wide shut.
So while you're condemning Hager, you might spare a few words on how you regard the methods and motives of Cameron Slater, Jason Ede, and John Key. Just for the record.
I also disagree about Hager's motives and the timing of this book. He's worked as an investigative journalist for decades, and written quite a few books. More often than not, they get more-or-less ignored. I guess if you're inclined to think badly of people's motives, you will. It's character-judgement, and some of it comes from the gut. But it should involve looking at evidence too.
Completely agree on the 'pub-talk' nature of much of the bragging. I felt this even more strongly with the (leaked) transcripts of the 'Urewera 17'. People talk all sorts of sh*t in private.
I don't think we can take much Slater wrote at face value. That's where Hager's judgement comes in. He's pretty careful to look for corroboration, and not to make claims that exceed the evidence he has. (Also- at leaving out details that invade personal privacy to make a political point. Which alone makes his work diametrically opposed to that of Slater et al. Nasty personal attacks were a speciality.)
Interested in your response, and not laughing at all. Feeling pretty bleak. -
izogi, in reply to
I don’t believe he will have any real influence after the election.
That's been my own impression, too, at least as far as direct influence goes. I guess you could note that he's dropped a bundle of money on a group which mightn't have otherwise had it. I'll be interested to see if his involvement has had any measurable effect on younger voter turnout.
-
FletcherB, in reply to
I fear his ego is bigger than his strategic smarts.
I fear this too, and I think saving your big reveal until only five days before the election is a sign you dont have those strategic smarts....
If you think you have election outcome changing info to share with the public, you need to know that it takes longer than five days for the public to shift... unless it's truely monumentally bad....
100% Proof that John Key has been lying about knowing about KDC would not be big enough to sway that many voters. that quickly. It seems large chunks of the public already beleive he's a liar and are still planning to vote for him.
Video of him shooting babies might be enough? I doubt thats available? :)
-
Trevor Nicholls, in reply to
this is not the first time a small political movement has been exclusively funded by a millionaire with a checkered history and dubious motives
My recollection is that the present government were so concerned about increased sponsorship of this kind that THEY CHANGED THE LAW to facilitate it. They've got absolutely no right to complain.
-
linger, in reply to
Not to mention that voting started today.
Anyone who wants to can cast an advance vote. Locations and opening hours of advance polling stations are available on the elections.org website electorate map; zoom in to your electorate and check the box to show the relevant icons.
(Since I’m going back to Japan next week, I have already cast mine.) -
Dismal Soyanz, in reply to
I guess you could note that he’s dropped a bundle of money on a group which mightn’t have otherwise had it.
Although the bundle has not dropped close enough to Georgina Beyer. Not much chance of Dotcom keeping her reined in methinks.
-
Spotted doing the rounds - anyone know if it can be verified? If so it would seem he can count his dirty money ok but his spelling could use some help aktshully.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Although the bundle has not dropped close enough to Georgina Beyer. Not much chance of Dotcom keeping her reined in methinks.
Wasn't Beyer brought into the fold a month ago by her friend Pam Corkery? Jeez.
-
Carol Stewart, in reply to
his spelling
Oh, if only his spelling was the worst of his faults.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.