Police raid Hager

Written By: - Date published: 4:07 pm, October 6th, 2014 - 401 comments
Categories: election 2014, police - Tags: , , , , , ,

Update: Nicky Hager’s statement is here.

Breaking…

https://twitter.com/radioovermoscow/status/518958883310555136

https://twitter.com/keith_ng/status/518961122418765824

401 comments on “Police raid Hager ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. CnrJoe 1
    6 October 2014 at 4:09 pm

    4.07
    He’s not just a journo, he’s award winning and lectures journalism, everyone knows these things.

  2. Draco T Bastard 2
    6 October 2014 at 4:10 pm

    Can’t say that I’m surprised. The police forces around the world inevitably support right-wing governments and act against left-wing. It’s been this way for centuries.

    • alwyn 2.1
      6 October 2014 at 4:31 pm

      That is so way over-the-top as to be silly.
      If you had simply claimed that police forces support their governments, of whatever political persuasion, you have an arguable case.
      When you claim that police forces “inevitably support right-wing governments and act against left-wing” are you being serious? Do you really say that the police forces in China, Cuba and Venezuela, to name just a few are acting against the interests of their Governments? Do you not accept that in the Soviet era in eastern Europe the police forces in countries like the USSR and East Germany were not doing exactly what their left wing governments required?

      • Tracey 2.1.1
        6 October 2014 at 4:35 pm

        what do you think about the timing of the raid? do you support a similar raid on fairfax… herald and tv3? why do you think they didnt raid the herald when fisher said he verified eails to be sure they were from rawshark?

      • Draco T Bastard 2.1.2
        6 October 2014 at 5:18 pm

        Actually, I was thinking more historically and the throwing of bombs that was, supposedly, the actions of anarchists but turned out to be the actions of the police at the orders of the feudal lords. And China isn’t left-wing, not sure on Cuba and as for the Venezuelan police:

        According to some sources Venezuela’s corruption includes widespread corruption in the police force.

        Considering the problems Venezuela has had with RWNJ governments over the centuries I can guess where that came from.

        • alwyn 2.1.2.1
          6 October 2014 at 5:38 pm

          Tracey.
          I don’t support this raid. It was only the idea that all police forces were invariably right wing and will not work for their left wing government that I thought was a bit extreme.

          Draco
          The pseudo anarchists would illustrate only that the police work for their government, as I would consider the “feudal” lords as being of the right.
          As far as Venezuela goes a corrupt Government is going to have corrupt police. See the item above the link to the police that you have posted. The whole judicial system is, thanks to what Chavez did, corrupt.
          All dictatorial governments have corrupt police, whether they are left or right.
          See East Germany or Franco’s Spain. The USSR or Hitler’s Germany. Cuba or Papa Doc’s Haiti. Venezuela or Pinochet’s Chile.
          I don’t really think that New Zealand is in that category.

          • TheContrarian 2.1.2.1.1
            6 October 2014 at 6:53 pm

            Draco is playing the No True Scotsman argument to the hilt.

            • Draco T Bastard 2.1.2.1.1.1
              6 October 2014 at 9:10 pm

              I did consider that but can you really say that China is commun1st? It’s actions label it a capitalist state and probably mercantilist at that.

              Just because Chavez appointed judges doesn’t make the judiciary corrupt. If it did then most of the world’s justice systems would be corrupt as high level judges are appointed politically across a large chunk of the world and a poll is not a good way to determine corruption either which is all that Transparency International do. To determine corruption you need evidence.

              Cuba is corrupt as all hell and, yes, it’s been dictatorial and, yes, it’s Left.

              Hitler’s Germany was most definitely right-wing as it raised corporations and business people above pretty much everything else just as Labour did, under the direction of proto-Act, in the 1980s and National are doing now.

              But, at the end of the day, a commun1st state is not dictatorial. As it doesn’t have a hierarchy at all it can’t be. It also runs as a democracy and allows freedom of expression and all other human rights.

              Now that’s either you’re No True Scotsman or an objective measure as to how to determine if a state is actually commun1st.

              • TheContrarian …
                6 October 2014 at 9:49 pm

                Venezula is considered by most measures and organisations to have a fairly high level of corruption.

                And no, I wouldn’t call China communist, more State Capitalism. But both left and right can be corrupt, you might want to argue to what extent and I am sure it would be interesting to compare but you did appear to play the Scotsman card and suggest otherwise

          • Tom Jackson 2.1.2.1.2
            6 October 2014 at 11:29 pm

            All police forces were invariably right wing.

            In capitalist countries they are. Thatcher used the police as a private militia to attack striking miners. For much of the 20th century in many countries the police were simply a right wing goon squad in many cases. In many parts of the US they still are.

            The police, like the army, select for authoritarian personalities. That’s why the police in some “left” wing countries are the same with regard to their governments. There’s loads of good cops, but when push comes to shove, they will do what they are told.

            That leaves people who have grievances with the authorities in their societies facing a hostile force that views them as enemies of the state rather than citizens exercising their rights. If you think the NZ Police won’t do what they’re told, try exercising your right to protest the leader of China next time he comes to visit. My sister did that once. The police forcibly corralled them into a small area and then parked a truck in front of them so that the latest Chinese tyrant wouldn’t have to see them.

    • Murray Olsen 2.2
      7 October 2014 at 2:43 am

      I think you can accurately say that in a country that swaps between neoliberal and social democratic governments on a regular basis, the police are always a uniformed branch of the neoliberals. Our own ngati poaka are definitely the uniformed branch of NAct and make this obvious here by the way they have treated Nicky Hager and Blubber Boy differently.

  3. just saying 3
    6 October 2014 at 4:11 pm

    God, this is the most depressing news in a weeks of bad news.

    • politikiwi 3.1
      6 October 2014 at 5:28 pm

      Wait until a law is passed which will make reporting on stories like this punishable with imprisonment.

      “Most Niu Cylinders don’t want to liff in a country where I can be held to account fir my ictions.”

      Think they won’t? You’ve only got to look at Australia to see the way things are going.

      It makes me so sad that people are welcoming authoritarianism with open arms on the basis that this is the only way to protect them from a threat which is virtually non-existent from a statistical viewpoint.

      Bathroom tiles are more dangerous than terrorists.

      • MrSmith 3.1.1
        6 October 2014 at 5:59 pm

        And hell the world is safer than it ever has been, but of-course they will argue that’s because of increased policing and surveillance know-doubt.
        So I would ask at what point do we stop the creep, come on, the price we pay for freedom is the fact we can never be completely safe, and yes some will die so we can be free, the alternative is unthinkable, they said Nanny state yet now we have the beginnings, of a Police state.

        • politikiwi 3.1.1.1
          6 October 2014 at 6:34 pm

          But it’s for our own good so I don’t see what the problem is, really.

          • Colonial Viper 3.1.1.1.1
            7 October 2014 at 1:25 am

            The thing to remember: when they build a Security State, it is there for THEIR security. Not yours and mine.

          • Scott1 3.1.1.1.2
            7 October 2014 at 7:00 am

            Security organizations have so much spare time between the very rare events where they really have to deal with a serious threat…. during that time they ‘need’ to find something to do with their idle hands.

    • Tom Jackson 3.2
      6 October 2014 at 11:59 pm

      Wouldn’t it be funny if Rawshark hacked the police computer system and sent material to Wikileaks?

  4. music4menz 4
    6 October 2014 at 4:19 pm

    But it shouldn’t be an issue ‘cos Hager has absolutely nothing to hide- does he?

    • framu 4.1
      6 October 2014 at 4:22 pm

      two elections – two police raids on journalists

      question is – does that worry you?

    • Colonial Viper 4.2
      6 October 2014 at 4:22 pm

      Arbitrary search and seizure has no place in a democracy and has already fucked this government up once (Kim Dotcom). I’m very surprised that you’re fine with it happening again.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 4.3
      6 October 2014 at 4:38 pm

      Thats what Banks said , ‘nothing too hide’, but used his lawyers twice to stop McCreadys information proceeding, then at his trail, ‘nothing to fear’, but wouldnt get into witness box !
      Considering the last time Banks was in witness box, the Judge concluded he was lying

      • Tracey 4.3.1
        6 October 2014 at 4:39 pm

        apparently that is the new principle at play in nz

        nothing to hide nothing to fear….

        excet for ms colins
        mr key et al

      • One Anonymous Bloke 4.3.2
        7 October 2014 at 9:14 am

        Speaking of judges, who signed this attack-masquerading-as-a-search warrant?

    • stigie 4.4
      6 October 2014 at 4:40 pm

      “But it shouldn’t be an issue ‘cos Hager has absolutely nothing to hide- does he”?

      Hell, i would’nt want to bet my house on it !!

      • Colonial Viper 4.4.1
        6 October 2014 at 4:43 pm

        Hager has done this nation a great service with his work in revealing Dirty Politics.

        • Naki man 4.4.1.1
          6 October 2014 at 5:13 pm

          the only dirty politics we have seen has been by the Internet Party and the people of NZ have shown how disgusted they are when they voted in the election.
          Hager is part of that an he deserves everything he gets.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 4.4.1.1.1
            6 October 2014 at 5:15 pm

            Which is why Judith Collins resigned in disgrace, and why there are three official investigations and John Key’s mendacious diversion in progress 🙂

            Resigned. In disgrace. 😆

            That twisted bully Collins. Gone 😆

            • Naki man 4.4.1.1.1.1
              6 October 2014 at 5:38 pm

              I think Collins was arrogant and foolish so like most kiwis I am glad she has gone

              • Draco T Bastard …
                6 October 2014 at 9:18 pm

                Arrogant and foolish seems to apply to a lot of National MPs. Personally, I just it corruption though.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 4.4.1.1.2
            6 October 2014 at 5:17 pm

            PS: Oh look everyone: a National Party representative advocating that the Police use powers of search and seizure to punish witnesses.

            No wonder the National Party are trash with that attitude.

          • blue leopard 4.4.1.1.3
            6 October 2014 at 5:19 pm

            @Naki Man

            So what are you saying?

            You dislike large amounts of money being donated openly with transparency toward a political party, but are o.k when it is done out of sight?

            Can you please clarify.

        • music4menz 4.4.1.2
          6 October 2014 at 5:21 pm

          Yes, he’s ‘done this nation a great service’ in helping to give John Key’s government a 3rd term. And in consigning the left to a further 3 years of political impotence. Well done Nicky.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 4.4.1.2.1
            6 October 2014 at 5:22 pm

            Didn’t take you long to expose your true character, did it, Wormtongue.

          • Naki man 4.4.1.2.2
            6 October 2014 at 5:47 pm

            Yes Hager scum should have the profits from his book confiscated, for profiting from a criminal act. But he did do NZ a favour by helping National into power. All these lefty extremist have been bitten in the arse by there filthy acts.

      • Tracey 4.4.2
        6 October 2014 at 4:45 pm

        Is that your family home or one of your rental properties?

    • Annie 4.5
      6 October 2014 at 5:31 pm

      music4menz, “You have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide”, right? Who else said that, oh yes, Goebbels.

    • Murray Olsen 4.6
      7 October 2014 at 2:47 am

      If you’d ever had your house infested with poaka over a period of ten hours, or even much fewer, you wouldn’t be so blasé about it. They’ve found nothing, but taken a heap of the Hager family belongings. They won’t expect to find anything. They’re doing it to intimidate one of the few Kiwis who hold the powerful to account.

    • Tracey 4.7
      7 October 2014 at 8:15 am

      says someone not using their real name. note to lprent… only stating that because it shows the stupidity of the nothing to fear nothing to hide idiots…

  5. greywarbler 5
    6 October 2014 at 4:23 pm

    It will be an operational matter. The police will have examined the evidence and decided of their own free will to raid Nicky Hager, fashion iconoclast. (He noticed that the emperor wasn’t wearing any clothes).

    That would have wound the police up, as nudity must not be countenanced. And going in the little slot on the police authority figure and turning it on is is what a key is for.

  6. infused 6
    6 October 2014 at 4:23 pm

    lols.

    • framu 6.1
      6 October 2014 at 4:29 pm

      you think its funny?

      didnt you once complain about nanny state, light bulbs and shower heads?

      • infused 6.1.1
        6 October 2014 at 4:34 pm

        He published stolen emails.

        What did you think was going to happen?

        • Tracey 6.1.1.1
          6 October 2014 at 4:37 pm

          so did herald fairfax and tv3.

          will they be raided next and why not already and before the election

          • infused 6.1.1.1.1
            6 October 2014 at 4:39 pm

            I guess it depends on what hager gave to them.

            I wouldn’t rule it out.

            • framu 6.1.1.1.1.1
              6 October 2014 at 4:41 pm

              why are you making excuses for what appears to be an ongoing pattern of politically motivated police actions?

            • Tracey 6.1.1.1.1.2
              6 October 2014 at 4:41 pm

              what? rawshark gave those media emails. we know that cos they went to court to defend publishing them…

              • King Kong …
                6 October 2014 at 4:56 pm

                TV3/Herald etc are journalists, Hager isn’t.

                • Tracey …
                  6 October 2014 at 4:59 pm

                  they raid journalists over the tea cup tapes…

                  what is your definition of a journalist?

                  • King Kong …
                    6 October 2014 at 5:01 pm

                    Certainly not the authors of one sided political attack novels.

                    • Tracey …
                      6 October 2014 at 5:05 pm

                      so not slater?

                      anyway what IS your definition… not what isnt it.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      6 October 2014 at 5:07 pm

                      Slater told the High Court the emails are genuine, which presents you with a problem. As a journalist, having evidence of the Prime Minister’s Office committing crimes, Hager had a duty to publish said evidence.

                      Go on, have another cry about it.

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      6 October 2014 at 5:23 pm

                      Good Job that Hager didn’t write write one of those then – he just published the truth that proved National to be completely corrupt.

                    • lurgee …
                      6 October 2014 at 6:53 pm

                      Certainly not the authors of one sided political attack novels.

                      By your definition, I doubt Bernstein and Woodward would count as journalists.

                      If Dirty Politics is a novel, it is a very poor one as there is little plot, the language is prosaic and there is no narrative resolution. But I don’t think Hager has been shown to be incorrect in any significant point of DP. Where he is speculating, it is clearly indicated.

                    • Matthew Whitehead …
                      6 October 2014 at 8:46 pm

                      How about teachers of journalism? LOL

                  • ghostwhowalksnz …
                    6 October 2014 at 5:04 pm

                    The tea tapes raid ( on TV3 and Herald) were about a microphone in plain sight

                    Key: Mmmm! Oh, yeah! Yeah, no, no, we’ve been down that road! That is why when they rang me in the UK I never ever thought of this, you know, 15 percent we’d have a snap election…
                    [quiet mumbling]
                    Banks: I didn’t know. I didn’t know.
                    Key: Well, you learn everyday. So, you want to do the standup? Is that yours? Is that yours? Is that yours?
                    Banks: No.
                    Key: Hey, that’s a recording device.
                    H/T The Jackal

                  • Naki man …
                    6 October 2014 at 6:40 pm

                    “they raid journalists over the tea cup tapes…

                    what is your definition of a journalist?’

                    This so called journalists hid a microphone at the table,
                    the smart arse little prick should have lost his job.

                    [lprent: You mean hidden like this?

                    See that wee bag in the foreground – that is it being “hidden”

                    Take 2 weeks off for bullshitting just a tad too much. If you want to make myths up, then do them on your own time. Stop wasting mine looking up an image for you. ]

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  6 October 2014 at 5:00 pm

                  “Nicky Hager is a New Zealand Investigative Journalist”

                  Wikipedia.

                  “Investigative Journalist Nickey Hager’s house…”

                  TV3.

                  Keep denying reality, you already look like a complete idiot.

            • Colonial Viper 6.1.1.1.1.3
              6 October 2014 at 4:45 pm

              why should publishing information in the public interest, and against the interests of a powerful few, be punished in this way? Is this a democracy?

              • Draco T Bastard …
                6 October 2014 at 5:28 pm

                Not if the RWNJs can help it. They really do prefer unaccountable dictatorships.

              • lurgee …
                6 October 2014 at 6:58 pm

                why should publishing information in the public interest, and against the interests of a powerful few, be punished in this way? Is this a democracy?

                He is not being ‘punished’ for publishing information in the public interest. The police are seeking evidence relating to a crime and Hager has already acknowledged they are quite right to do so. He (and I, FWIW) just thinks they’re being stupid thinking he would leave Rawshark’s name on a post it note stuck to his computer screen.

                Your hyperbole is as pointlessly stupid as King Kong’s, above.

                • Murray Olsen …
                  7 October 2014 at 2:59 am

                  Nope. He’s being punished. That’s why they’ve taken so much of the family stuff away. They will be thinking that they’ll probably never get Rawshark, so they’ll be trying to make his life as uncomfortable as possible. Since he’s a public figure, he’ll probably get it all back. Eventually.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke …
                    7 October 2014 at 6:52 am

                    I wonder if it will expose the National Party source for The Hollow Men. Or did Key accidentally confess to that a while back?

                    Edit: it’s his current work they’ll be most interested in, I suppose.

        • framu 6.1.1.2
          6 October 2014 at 4:40 pm

          we all know your not that dense

          didnt you once complain about nanny state, light bulbs and shower heads?

          so

          what do you have to say about a journo who exposed state corruption all of a sudden being raide by the police – and the fact that this is a repeat of what happened at the last election?

          oh – its funny cause emails?

          grubby little authoritarian apologist

          • infused 6.1.1.2.1
            6 October 2014 at 4:40 pm

            cry me a river.

            • framu 6.1.1.2.1.1
              6 October 2014 at 4:41 pm

              answer the fucking question

              are you in favour of the govt using state resources to shut down dissent or not?

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                6 October 2014 at 4:47 pm

                That’s a yes.

              • infused …
                6 October 2014 at 4:50 pm

                Keep twisting it however you see fit.

                [lprent: Oh piss off if you just want to troll. Banned 16 weeks. ]

                • framu …
                  6 October 2014 at 4:53 pm

                  answer the question!

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  6 October 2014 at 4:54 pm

                  Keep supporting a government and Police force that are going to lose another court action after carrying out what looks very much like another illegal search and seizure, and expose the taxpayer to yet another civil case for compensation, while you wave a little Quisling surrender flag.

                  • weka …
                    6 October 2014 at 5:20 pm

                    Problem is, this govt appearst to not actually care about the courts. Yep, that’s how serious this is.

                  • lurgee …
                    6 October 2014 at 7:01 pm

                    after carrying out what looks very much like another illegal search and seizure

                    Hager has already said they had warrants and were entitled under law to search his property for evidence. The law may be draconian, but it is legitimate. Stop getting carried away.

                    • miravox …
                      7 October 2014 at 1:23 am

                      I doubt that Hager thinks the law is legitimate (in the sense that it is justified)

                      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/10585208/Nicky-Hagers-house-raided-by-police

                      ”It is really crossing the line to think it’s OK to come and do someone’s house over, over a book, when they were very clear I’m only a witness and haven’t done anything wrong,” Hager said.

                      He did not believe authorities had yet looked at the material taken from his home. A legal fight would “begin now” to establish whether investigators would be able to access the material, he said…

                      Hager said the police raid was “dangerous for journalism in New Zealand” and he would not cooperate with efforts to reveal his source.

                      “My investigative journalism work means I have an unnegotiable obligation to protect all my sources and the confidences of other people who approach me.”

                      The author warned the action was chilling for other media in New Zealand.

                      While he accepted the police had the right under the law to be there, he was critical of the powers they were afforded.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      7 October 2014 at 1:30 am

                      The law may be draconian, but it is legitimate.

                      Outstanding Orwellian Doublespeak.

                    • Tracey …
                      7 October 2014 at 8:21 am

                      the theft of emails is regarded as serious enough to override the Evidence Act. an interesting precedent

                    • lurgee …
                      7 October 2014 at 8:45 am

                      Outstanding Orwellian Doublespeak.

                      ‘It’ in my original comment referred to the actions of the police, which are legitimised by the draconian law.

                      If you think stating the truth is ‘doublespeak’ then there is a problem in your head.

                      The original comment was in response to OAB post that the police may have committed an “illegal search and seizure”. My quibble is with the word ‘illegal’.

                    • lurgee …
                      7 October 2014 at 9:04 am

                      the theft of emails is regarded as serious enough to override the Evidence Act. an interesting precedent

                      I think this is basically the same concept they are using on Slater in the Blomfield trial. He (Slater) might be a journalist, but if the material was obtained criminally, so the current thinking goes, then the public interest in apprehending the criminal negates the journalist’s right to not disclose sources, and Section 68-2 applies.

                      http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2006/0069/latest/DLM393681.html

                      I’d say NEITHER 68-2 a and b apply (and they both must for the first article to be set aside). Hager’s reputation and the public good are both negatively affected by the seizing of his documents even if it leads to the identification of Rawshark.

                      Justice Asher’s ruling was that Slater had to cough up names because “This is not a whistleblower case. There are no political issues, or matters of public importance at stake … There is nothing to indicate that the informers have been driven by altruistic motives.” Rawshark is certainly different, as there is a political angle and an overwhelming public interest in knowing our political leaders are venal backstabbers.

                      It is very &*%$ing doubtful that the disclosure of who hacked into an attack blog is in the same league.

                    • Tracey …
                      7 October 2014 at 11:53 am

                      Except the police havent sent 5 cops to spend ten hours in slaters home and office, have they?

          • Tracey 6.1.1.2.2
            6 October 2014 at 4:43 pm

            infused thinks hager gave rawshark emails to fairfax herald ad tv3, so he is not writing from an informed position. see above.

        • ghostwhowalksnz 6.1.1.3
          6 October 2014 at 4:41 pm

          Cameron Slater has lost a bid to stop three media outlets reporting information they have obtained from the hacker RawShark (aka Whaledump).
          The order (see it in full below) also does not apply to Nicky Hager’s book Dirty Politics or information currently held by the media outlets.

          So the police are looking for something that Hager is allowed to do

        • framu 6.1.1.4
          6 October 2014 at 4:47 pm

          “He published stolen emails.”

          ok – real slowly now – everyone clap along so infused can keep track

          He published stolen emails. – AS…. A…. JOURNALIST. – not as an MP sneaking about someones computer system or as a hate blogger

          • Del Griffith 6.1.1.4.1
            6 October 2014 at 5:09 pm

            Interesting, I would have thought a journalist would have interviewed the people he was writing about and attempted a bit of balance in the book by showing the sorts of things Labour got up to.

            Just out of interest would you be cool with someone hacking into Bomber Bradburys emails and Facebook and publishing them?

            The lead detective in the case said Hagar was a witness not a suspect, I doubt he has anything useful to them anyway.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 6.1.1.4.1.1
              6 October 2014 at 5:30 pm

              Prime Minsiter’s Office stealing NZLP membership data and credit card details. Perpetrators admitted emails boasting of the crime are genuine. Prime Minister’s Office confessing crime to NZLP.

              Open and shut case: a theft from the opposition by the government.

              Your position: to cheer and wave a little Quisling flag.

              • Del Griffith …
                6 October 2014 at 5:50 pm

                I’m not sure why you saw fit to say I was waving a Quisling flag when I asked a genuine question. I don’t think people should be able to hack into other peoples computers and write books based on the stuff they find in there and profit from it.

                [lprent: That is an assertion that is defamatory, not supported by any facts, and recklessly puts this site into danger. Plus you look like a simple troll with your brains in a tiny deformed dick that you obsessively pump as you comment. Banned permanently. Don’t come back ]

                • weka …
                  6 October 2014 at 5:59 pm

                  Just as well Hager didn’t hack into WO’s computer then. Do you understand the difference between a journalist and their source?

                  • Del Griffith …
                    6 October 2014 at 7:14 pm

                    [deleted]

                    Draco, if you could tone down the accusations please I haven’t insulted you nor do I intend to.

                    [lprent: Pretty rich bearing in mind your performance today. see http://thestandard.org.nz/police-raid-hager/#comment-905169 ]

                    • weka …
                      6 October 2014 at 7:23 pm

                      “Yep and I think there was a recent court case that might prove he isn’t a journalist.”

                      Hager? So if he is a journalist, you will accept he did nothing wrong?

                      I’ll repeat my point, Hager didn’t steal any emails, so your point about it being wrong to profit from hacking is invalid.

                      “I also understand that people shouldn’t proceed from crimes either.”

                      But journalists profit from crimes everytime they use a source that is a criminal and get paid for writing the story.

                      The only way Hager could be considered to be profiting from crime is if he instigated the hack or took part in it. There is no evidence that either of those things are true.

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  6 October 2014 at 6:00 pm

                  Because you’re here spreading the lies that National put out and only a quisling, such as yourself, would do that.

            • politikiwi 6.1.1.4.1.2
              6 October 2014 at 5:31 pm

              “I doubt he has anything useful to them anyway.”

              Well if that’s not an admission that this is all just intimidation by the Police, I don’t know what is.

            • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.4.1.3
              6 October 2014 at 5:35 pm

              Ah, a RWNJ’s bought the lies that National have been spreading that Labour did it too.

              HINT: There’s no evidence that Labour have acted in way similar to the corrupt actions of National.

            • Huginn 6.1.1.4.1.4
              6 October 2014 at 9:50 pm

              Del Griffith
              ‘would [I] be cool with someone hacking into Bomber Bradburys emails and Facebook and publishing them?’

              Yes. If publication revealed something to us that was in the public interest to know, absolutely.

              I can’t believe that you’re even asking this.

              • Tom Jackson …
                6 October 2014 at 11:41 pm

                ‘would [I] be cool with someone hacking into Bomber Bradburys emails

                Who wants to read emails from Trademe about bids for Star Wars action figures?

          • Granted 6.1.1.4.2
            6 October 2014 at 6:07 pm

            Oh, so are journalists entitled to steal emails?

            [lprent: Asserting a crime that never happened – which is defamatory. Banned for simple trolling and simply being too stupid to be bothered with as well. ]

        • Chris 6.1.1.5
          6 October 2014 at 5:26 pm

          So you’d be okay if the cops raided Slater’s house looking for emails stolen from Blomfield? Slater seems to think so:

          http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/10585208/Nicky-Hagers-house-raided-by-police

            • politikiwi 6.1.1.5.1.1
              6 October 2014 at 6:38 pm

              The IRD, at least, should be interested in the money he claims to be making from his blog. It wasn’t exactly public knowledge that a number of his posts were bought and paid for by Carrick Graham, Katherine Rich et al.

          • Murray Olsen 6.1.1.5.2
            7 October 2014 at 3:16 am

            FFS Slugboy is such a moran. He’s just effectively said he has to say where he got Blomfield’s stuff from. I don’t think self awareness is his strong point.

            I also don’t know why Stuff thought he would have anything worthwhile to contribute. They would have been better speaking to the police or a lawyer and reporting that. Instead, one of the scummiest men in the country is once again used as a source. Nothing seems to have changed.

  7. Bill 7
    6 October 2014 at 4:23 pm

    Am I to seriously entertain the notion that Hager would have anything in his possession that would warrant a raid on his home? No, of course not. Somebody merely wants to reinforce that old “Do NOT question authority” chestnut.

    I’ll be interested to see how the polis and the media spin this shit.

    • CnrJoe 7.1
      6 October 2014 at 4:29 pm

      “Cops raid Dirty Politics Nicky Hager’s home. His book number 6 on non fiction best sellers’ list, so could this be proceeds of crime?” Barry Soper on twitter

      • MrV 7.1.1
        6 October 2014 at 5:07 pm

        Soper, what a wet sop. Nobody has suggested Hager is under investigation, they are looking for so-called ‘Rawshark’.
        I doubt they’re going to find him if they are now resorting to searching journalists houses.
        Zealous prosecution of what isn’t even a crime, or at best an issue of political nature is never going to look good for the Police whilst they cry lack of resources to investigate/respond to other crime.

  8. Colonial Viper 8
    6 October 2014 at 4:23 pm

    This is just dire, undemocratic news.

  9. cogito 9
    6 October 2014 at 4:23 pm

    Keystapo.

  10. tinfoilhat 10
    6 October 2014 at 4:25 pm

    Disgraceful.

  11. Tracey 11
    6 October 2014 at 4:28 pm

    have they raided fairfax tv3 herald etc.

    • Chooky 11.1
      6 October 2014 at 4:32 pm

      have they raided Keys top drawer yet?….and where is Jason?…surely they can find him?….we need him for an investigation into dirty ops and the Prime Minister!

  12. karol 12
    6 October 2014 at 4:29 pm

    NZ Herald reports:

    Mr Hager confirmed that police raided his home in a bid to find information about the hacker known as Rawshark, who gave Mr Hager the emails.

    Computer equipment was taken away from Mr Hager’s house.

    Mr Hager said he was seeking legal advice and wouldn’t be talking to media.

    Of course Hager would be careful about what he keeps. This is just intimidation.

    And Hager’s statement.

    • Dave_1924 12.1
      6 October 2014 at 6:47 pm

      Indeed Karol – I believe Hager is on record as saying he has already disposed of everything he was given by the thief/hacker.

      Is it intimidation? Or are the police following up on a complaint of theft, by searching the house of a self acknowledged prime recipient of the stolen material? Maybe a little of both….

      Personally Slater should be treated in the same manner if he is in receipt of stolen material…. has Bloomfield laid a criminal complaint or is he just pursuing Slater in a civil claim?

      Political activists in NZ from elected MPs down through the various party structures to the free thinking non aligned activists need to ask themselves:

      Do we really want to condone targeted criminal activity [hacking/theft of materials] as part of the political process, as long as we funnel items gained through said criminal activity through the saintly hands of someone who is a Journalist who will magically wash it clean in the “Public Interest”?

      I know I don’t want that for NZ…..

    • lurgee 12.2
      6 October 2014 at 7:23 pm

      I’m going with police just being really stupid, for the moment. Plenty of evidence to support that.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 12.2.1
        7 October 2014 at 7:09 am

        If they were simply stupid – by which I guess you mean error-prone, there would be no discernible pattern to their ‘mistakes’.

        Instead, there is a consistent pattern.

  13. r0b 13
    6 October 2014 at 4:30 pm

    Post updated with link to Hager’s statement.

  14. Blue 14
    6 October 2014 at 4:31 pm

    Hope they brought some donuts to keep themselves busy on their pointless time-wasting exercise. Our tax dollars at work.

  15. just saying 15
    6 October 2014 at 4:32 pm

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ULLnrJsA6CY

    A new theme song for National to purloin and adapt without permission.
    With huge apologies to the Topp Twins, (I love this song)

    • Chooky 15.1
      6 October 2014 at 4:43 pm

      that is the song for people to remember as they stand up to John key Nactional!

      ….and from two great Kiwi farmer girls!

      • just saying 15.1.1
        6 October 2014 at 5:26 pm

        Yeah I know. But the song immediately lodged itself in my head.
        All that untouchable, untouchable, untouchable…
        Three years of untouchable National government.
        Was in a WINZ office last week. Got my own personal security-guard escort all the way from the front door to my seat. Had to show ID to even get in the door. Cos I’m so dangerous.

        And the freaking media described the pathetic Labour president’s missive to members as “orwellian”.

        • Chooky 15.1.1.1
          6 October 2014 at 6:28 pm

          just play the Topp Twins song to yourself in your head as you walk into WINZ..it a fantastic Kiwi song of courage and resistance!

          ..there I have just played it again!

  16. Saarbo 16
    6 October 2014 at 4:39 pm

    This is disgusting, surely there will be protests. Meanwhile Eade and Nationals “attack politics” gets brushed under the carpet.

    • Anne 16.1
      6 October 2014 at 6:42 pm

      Oh, the police are very good at brushing things under the carpet believe me. Have had personal experience of it.

      No doubt the NZ Police have given Slater/Ede/ Odgers et al their blessing to continue with Dirty Politics. No action will be taken against them. Corruption in a big way!!

  17. mickysavage 17
    6 October 2014 at 4:45 pm

    Gee you would hope that if the police received a complaint about someone on the right who had engaged in the same sort of activity they would also exercise the same powers. Otherwise the police would be compromised …

  18. infused 18
    6 October 2014 at 4:48 pm

    Can’t reply above for some reason.

  19. greywarbler 19
    6 October 2014 at 4:50 pm

    Police have got to keep in practice. Mission one carried out in the Ureweras on Tuhoe. Dotcom was next I guess. How many missions of different sorts based on spying and dirty politics since then?

    • alwyn 19.1
      6 October 2014 at 5:48 pm

      Didn’t you ever watch Fawlty Towers with the repeated phrase “Don’t mention the war”?
      Don’t even think to mention the Tuhoe raids. As you may or may not remember they were in 2007 and we all remember which party was in Government then.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_New_Zealand_police_raids

    • Lloyd 19.2
      6 October 2014 at 9:51 pm

      I am waiting for the armed police raid on the headquarters of that proven three times breaker of copyright on music for political television advertisements, the National Party. Surely it is three strikes and you are out?

  20. One Anonymous Bloke 20
    6 October 2014 at 4:50 pm

    They’ll be raiding Slater and the Prime Minister’s Office to ascertain exactly who in that office hacked the New Zealand Labour Party’s computers, stealing membership and credit card details, any day now.

    Unless they’re enemies of society, operating under double standards, that is.

  21. Mike 21
    6 October 2014 at 4:52 pm

    This is great news. This guy has written a book using stolen information. End of story –
    he should be prosecuted. It so happens he exposed a lot of right wing secrets. If it was exposing Labours secrets everyone on this blog would be up in arms.

    • Tracey 21.1
      6 October 2014 at 4:55 pm

      nope. many who post here would be appalled… including many who do vote labour. you keep telling yourself stories mike to feel better about your own lack of ethics.

      • Mike 21.1.1
        6 October 2014 at 4:59 pm

        Tracey, Why do you suggest I dont have ethics. It seems simple to me if someone uses stolen information for any reason it is unethical and probably illegal. Someone on this blog has suggested someone on the right hacked into Labours computers. I would regard that the same – if people believe it they should lay a complaint with the police.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 21.1.1.1
          6 October 2014 at 5:03 pm

          A complaint was laid with Police weeks ago. people believe it because the perpetrators boasted about it in emails and then presented evidence to the High Court claiming that the emails are genuine.

          So Slater is either a thief or a perjurer, just to bring you up to speed.

        • emergency mike 21.1.1.2
          6 October 2014 at 5:24 pm

          “It seems simple to me if someone uses stolen information for any reason it is unethical and probably illegal.”

          Unless that information is sufficiently in the public interest. This principle is pretty well known and accepted Mike. If a thief steals a laptop and finds evidence on it that the owner is sacrificing babies in his basement, would it be ‘unethical’ of him to alert the police? Noes.

          There are always grey exceptions. As much as your tiny brain would like the world to be black or white, it just isn’t.

    • framu 21.2
      6 October 2014 at 4:55 pm

      well then – i expect you to be calling for slater and the PMs office to be raided next then

      • Mike 21.2.1
        6 October 2014 at 5:00 pm

        If there is evidence they have hacked someone elses computers and stolen information. Yes I would.

        • mickysavage 21.2.1.1
          6 October 2014 at 5:05 pm

          Well have a look at the Blomfield case and see the allegations made there. And read Dirty Politics and pick and choose what you want to investigate.

          For instance the accessing of the Labour Party computer was clearly the unauthorised accessing a computer system.

          • Mike 21.2.1.1.1
            6 October 2014 at 5:09 pm

            Lay a complaint with the Police then.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 21.2.1.1.1.1
              6 October 2014 at 5:12 pm

              Are you witless as well as ignorant? You’ve already been informed of the Police complaint.

              We need better wingnuts.

          • ghostwhowalksnz 21.2.1.1.2
            6 October 2014 at 5:12 pm

            But did they lay a formal complaint ?

            WE all know how it works. Peter Jackson claimed New Line Cinema ripped him off over the revenues of Hobbit series. He had to go to court in LA to make his claim.

            Hollywood/ MPAA Claim Dotcom ripped them off, FBI- NZ Police throw him into jail in NZ.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 21.2.1.2
          6 October 2014 at 5:11 pm

          Please try and get up to speed Mike: Slater gave evidence in the High Court that the emails are genuine. In the emails he boasts about stealing credit card and membership details from the NZLP with as-yet un-named accomplices from the Prime Minister’s Office.

          Don’t mention it.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 21.3
      6 October 2014 at 4:57 pm

      English comprehension 101.

      Witnesses aren’t under suspicion or threat of prosecution. Unless you think the police are lying.

      Please stop exposing your cretinous ignorance in public. You’re a joke.

      • Mike 21.3.1
        6 October 2014 at 5:06 pm

        OAB. Stop exposing your lack of morals. If Hager used stolen information to write his book (which he has admitted he did) then it seems to me this is dealing in stolen property (intellectual) for pecuniary gain. Whoever does this on whatever side of the political spectrum should be prosecuted. Because the Police have said Hagar is only a witness does not mean after examining all the evidence they may decide he is more than a witness.

        • lprent 21.3.1.1
          6 October 2014 at 5:31 pm

          Talking about morals and the police.

          Ok so why haven’t the police raided Cameron Slaters places and grabbed all of his computers? He has possession of emails and other documents that are claimed to have been stolen in the Blomfield case.

          Because he is a mate of John Key?

          The police and most of the right (and you) are curiously inconsistent on what they consider to be “moral”

        • One Anonymous Bloke 21.3.1.2
          6 October 2014 at 5:44 pm

          It seems to you, and no-one else. Evidence that the Prime Minsiter’s Office has admitted to be true: they stole from the NZLP, doesn’t seem to concern you.

          That’s because you’re either mendacious or ignorant or twisted by bias. Which is it?

        • Tracey 21.3.1.3
          7 October 2014 at 11:59 am

          Was lprents question too hard?!?

    • Draco T Bastard 21.4
      6 October 2014 at 5:48 pm

      This is great news.

      No, this is the news you get when your democracy is failing and turning into a dictatorship.

      This guy has written a book using stolen information.

      That’s about the only way to expose corruption. The people who do it should be given meddles.

      If it was exposing Labours secrets everyone on this blog would be up in arms.

      Nope, we’d be even more angry and Labour’s vote would drop very close to zero. We on the Left actually have ethics and morals.

    • Murray Olsen 21.5
      7 October 2014 at 3:36 am

      If it were exposing similar activities by Labour or any other opposition party, I would want these activities investigated to the full extant of the law. I would want the perpetrators held responsible and kicked out of politics. You are 100% correct as far as I’m concerned. I’d be up in arms.

      Funny that it’s never happened though, isn’t it? Has there been an attack by a leftish blog that you think may have been a result of leaked official information? Point me to it and we can all investigate.

  22. greywarbler 22
    6 October 2014 at 4:58 pm

    Infused is hardly a worthy RW commenter is he. Just a twisted, sneering little twerp. If we want anyone to argue with, we actually can do that amongst ourselves without providing him with his perverse pleasure.

    [lprent: I came to that conclusion after reading a series of his comments today. He needed time to refresh himself away from this site. So I gave him that time. ]

  23. Heather 23
    6 October 2014 at 4:59 pm

    I wonder if they took away Jason’s computer when he resigned or left or went away into a hole?
    Makes you wonder who will be next? maybe this site will be raided to see what goes on !

    • lurgee 23.1
      6 October 2014 at 7:34 pm

      Has anyone alleged Ede has committed a crime and made a complait to the police about it?

      That’s how they (are meant to) operate. Contrary to CV’s fantasies, we don’t live in a police state. It is very probable this action is a result of a complaint made by one C. Slater about theft of his property.

  24. Jrobin 24
    6 October 2014 at 5:02 pm

    Outrageous, hypocritical control freaks! Mike, Nicky has exposed Labours secrets in the past. Why don’t you inform yourself before making dumb comments.

  25. tc 25
    6 October 2014 at 5:03 pm

    Hager will likely be spotless but that’s not the point, this gives the MS Muppetts some new material in the rolling maul of divert, diffuse, slogan/catchphrase/theme …rinse and repeat.

    NZP continue to get better work stories from their political masters.

    Coming up next week it’s a re-run of the evil german and back to some stats mangling for the NZP…….pssst don’t mention the war !

    • ghostwhowalksnz 25.1
      6 October 2014 at 5:16 pm

      They will be cracking his email password so they can check all his emails going back some years.
      The computers will be forensically searched , most likely by sending clones to FBI to catch anything deleted or if overseas email providers used, for NSA to back search

      • phillip ure 25.1.1
        6 October 2014 at 7:08 pm

        @ ghost..

        ..he/hager wd have been under surveillance for yrs..

        ..i presume he wd have assumed that..

        • Murray Olsen 25.1.1.1
          7 October 2014 at 3:45 am

          Hager has obviously been under surveillance for years. The SIS and/or GCSB will have anything that’s gone in or out of his computers. The police won’t, so either the squirrels won’t cooperate with police in an investigation, or this has been intimidation. My money’s on intimidation.

      • Richard 25.1.2
        6 October 2014 at 8:05 pm

        ghost they can get his traffic from his ISP. unless he was smart enough to use an internet café and a good fake email.

        I’m also sure the hacker would have told Hagar how to properly delete his data. Amongst other tips to keep them both safe wouldn’t you think?

        Zero the drive after deleting the data and write crap over it to change the polarity markers and clues as to their last orientation. If so, no expert in the world will know or be able to recover anything.

        I know that as one of NZ’s top IT engineers in the past for Arche technologies back in the day, a hacker would make me look stupid.

  26. blue leopard 26
    6 October 2014 at 5:09 pm

    Would the many left wing politicians and political commentators who referred to Hager’s ‘Dirty Politics’ as a distraction prior to the election, please think before you comment on this latest news?

    • weka 26.1
      6 October 2014 at 5:23 pm

      One of the criticisms is that the timing was a distraction (not the book or its content). I can see it both ways, for the election and for the book.

      • blue leopard 26.1.1
        6 October 2014 at 5:27 pm

        It was only a distraction because that is the way it was framed. It could have been turned into a platform for addressing problems with our democracy by our left wing politicians, instead they ended up spreading the idea that only served the right-wing that it was a ‘distraction’.

        It was up to the leftwing politicians to turn that meme around, instead they simply carried it on.

        The leftwing needs to become a whole lot more savvy at challenging the bullshit narrative the NZ population is being fed. Not weakly agreeing with it.

        • MrV 26.1.1.1
          6 October 2014 at 5:31 pm

          Yes you are absolutely right about that, the way the surveillance state is overseen is of fundamental importance to democracy, yet the left decided to engage in dotcom bashing because everyone else was doing it too. Or the polls or focus groups said x. That is not leadership.

        • Karen 26.1.1.2
          6 October 2014 at 5:41 pm

          + 100 blue leopard

        • weka 26.1.1.3
          6 October 2014 at 5:46 pm

          And yet the people who’s professional job it is is to run election campaigns felt the timing meant that their carefully prepared strategies weren’t going to work as well. Am thinking the GP here, but it’s probably true for Labour too. They don’t get to control the MSM, so instead of using their public time to promote themselves and their policies, they have to share the space with the Hager revelations. I think you are suggesting they could have taken better advantage of that. Perhaps that’s true, but I tend to think that the GP have a better idea of how to reach their voters than you or I. For them the issue is about increasing their vote so the govt can be changed, and I would guess that’s more important at that time than debating issues of democracy. Even if we think that democracy is more important, it’s still a distraction from the core of what the GP were trying to achieve at that time.

          “It could have been turned into a platform for addressing problems with our democracy by our left wing politicians”

          Right, but was the few weeks before the election the best time to be doing that? The timing was good for the issues that Hager was raising, it meant they got a much bigger hearing than they probably would have at other times, but I’m not convinced it was good for the GP who wanted to talk about policy more wide ranging than the issues of democracy that DP raises.

          It’s also possible that the debate about what the book raised would have been less sensational but more considered if it had happened at another time.

          Like I said, I can see it both ways.

          • blue leopard 26.1.1.3.1
            6 October 2014 at 6:01 pm

            Your first paragraph is simply an appeal to authority. This would be fine if the NZ left were winning, but they are not.

            Your other comment misses the point. I’m not discussing whether ‘Dirty Politics’ should have come out at that time or not. I am discussing constructive ways of dealing with it once it had come out.

            The NZ left/politicians can’t do anything about when a story is broadcast or how the media chooses to frame it but they can choose how to respond to each story. I am suggesting that they didn’t do a good job of responding to the story in a way that worked for them/the leftwing/us.

            I believe my constructive criticism is more helpful for the NZ left than making apologies for their failings will ever be.

            • Richard 26.1.1.3.1.1
              6 October 2014 at 6:07 pm

              I may not agree with you Blue L but I do appreciate your fairly even and constructive point of view from the other side of the spectrum. Without which many wouldn’t know the arguments that come up against them.

              • blue leopard …
                6 October 2014 at 6:23 pm

                @Richard,

                That is odd, I have been reading quite a few of your comments and agreeing with many with them.

                Have you read many of my comments or simply made your assessment re ‘from the other side of the spectrum’ merely on the colour mentioned in my pseudonym?

                National don’t have sole rights to ‘blue’ although I accept it could be confusing to some who doesn’t look at the content of my comments.

                • Richard …
                  6 October 2014 at 6:32 pm

                  I have read many of yours, I agree I did think your name had a national meaning, but was surprised at your even argument.

                  Hence my reply. My comment on Not agreeing with you should be expanded to say

                  I may not agree with you everytime but…

                  IO just got home from work, very very tired, hard day excuses and just didn’t think the sentence through.

                  my Bad.

                  • blue leopard …
                    6 October 2014 at 7:05 pm

                    No probs, Richard
                    Hope your day improves 🙂

                    • Richard …
                      6 October 2014 at 7:49 pm

                      Thanks mate, I have worked like a beaver today to complete a massive order. I’m one weld neck on an API flange from three weeks on a massive heavy duty lathe complete mission. I’m practically doing them in my dreams I’ve done so many.

                      By Thursday I shall have recovered I suspect. Frankly I’m nackered.

                      Thanks for understanding, as I felt crap after reading your reply then reading my post properly.

            • weka 26.1.1.3.1.2
              6 October 2014 at 6:07 pm

              “Your first paragraph is simply an appeal to authority.”

              What?

              “Your other comment misses the point. I’m not discussing whether ‘Dirty Politics’ should have come out at that time or not. I am discussing constructive ways of dealing with it once it had come out.”

              Ok, so it’s valid for the GP to have the analysis that the timing of the book was a distraction, but they shouldn’t have said so and should have instead focussed on the book’s content and used that as part of their election campaign?

              Sorry, still not quite getting it. Are we disagreeing on the whether parties should focus on getting elected vs bigger issues of democracy, or am I missing something?

              I didn’t see the GP making a big deal out of the timing being a distraction, but then I don’t follow the MSM directly very much.

            • Murray Olsen 26.1.1.3.1.3
              7 October 2014 at 3:52 am

              Labour has no idea how to tell its own story. They accept the Tory framing of the narrative and argue about a few of the details. This was my complaint about Cunliffe in the debates, accepting that Key had saved us from the GFC. Once he’d said that, he might as well have got down on your knees and prayed to him.

              The tragedy is that no one else in Labour would have done any better.

        • Marksman33 26.1.1.4
          6 October 2014 at 6:41 pm

          Agreed blue leopard, now we are getting to the crux of the matter.

        • phillip ure 26.1.1.5
          6 October 2014 at 7:10 pm

          @ blue leopard..

          “..It was up to the leftwing politicians to turn that meme around, instead they simply carried it on.

          The leftwing needs to become a whole lot more savvy at challenging the bullshit narrative the NZ population is being fed. Not weakly agreeing with it…”

          + 1..

    • Richard 26.2
      6 October 2014 at 6:16 pm

      From labour, I heard silence, to the point it looked like Labour had a hand involved. From the Greens outrage, same from IM who actually went so far as to promote it.

      I do think Hagars book timing was stupid but think his book is completely truthful and raised serious questions that are still to be answered. However trying to derail an election was wrong and it backfired.

      If he had launched it now he may, may not have made the same money, but he would have focused the media more on it instead. They also would not have had the reply of distraction or Left wing conspiracy.

      As for the legality of stealing emails in the public interest as judges have already agreed, it’s a bad look for the police to be hunting the hacker, when he just exposed serious breeches in illegal parliamentary shenanigans.

      This whole thing is a mess. I still want to see the ombudswomans report.

      • Tom Jackson 26.2.1
        6 October 2014 at 11:51 pm

        However trying to derail an election was wrong and it backfired.

        On what planet can it be considered wrong or “derailing” an election to expose corrupt political practices?

        Your moral compass needs recalibrating.

        • Richard 26.2.1.1
          7 October 2014 at 6:28 am

          and your comprehension needs a lot of work. Tom.

          I was on about timing being wrong to hard to grasp? Plucking a line just like the media do to divert attention from the context.

          Earlier or Later but not when the election period is in full flight.

          It’s never wrong to expose it, how you do it’s the thing. He could have taken all that info to a political party(NOT NATS) and let the professional MP’s sort out there own kind in a proper way that would not look like glorified book sales advertising.

  27. dv 27
    6 October 2014 at 5:13 pm

    i wonder how the police are getting on with the Roast Busters Case.

  28. MrV 28
    6 October 2014 at 5:17 pm

    So Odgers and Slater will be arrested anytime soon on charges of conspiracy to murder?

  29. yeshe 29
    6 October 2014 at 5:35 pm

    And we don’t even have a sworn-in government yet .. omg

    Kia kaha, Nicky Hager … stay safe, please. We need you.

    • blue leopard 29.1
      6 October 2014 at 5:38 pm

      +1 Yeshe

    • Kiwiri 29.2
      6 October 2014 at 5:42 pm

      And we don’t even have a sworn-in government yet

      And what used to be the main opposition party has Parker as a leader who issues statements more like an undertaker than caretaker?

  30. ianmac 30
    6 October 2014 at 5:43 pm

    Outrageous raid!
    Mind you, Nicky is no fool and no pushover. The police will have to be very, very careful that the warrant (?) is justified.
    Of course the Right side will howl with glee that Nicky is being “punished” regardless of the public interest. Be an interesting court case with we the people crowd-sourcing for Nicky.

  31. ianmac 31
    6 October 2014 at 5:45 pm

    The raid was last Thursday 2 October.

  32. Mike 32
    6 October 2014 at 5:50 pm

    What a bunch of twisted conspiracists. No wonder you did so well on the 20th September!

    • weka 33.1
      6 October 2014 at 6:13 pm

      The upshot of which is:

      – that the police spent 10 hours going through Hager’s life and home with a fine tooth comb while he was elsewhere.

      – they’ve taken a wide range of material, not just the Rawshark related stuff

      – this material is sealed in evidence bags and a long legal process will now unfold as to whether the police are allowed to look at the material.

      – Hager says if they had spoken to him first they might have made different decisions about how to handle this, given that he has taken steps to protect his source (ie there is nothing at home about Rawshark)

      – they have seized a range of material related to other projects that Hager is working on.

      Given that Hager is a witness not a suspect, and it’s been weeks since the publication of his book (so let’s assume he’s removed any relevant material from his home), it’s hard to see this as anything other than intimidation, of Hager and his family, other journalists, and anyone who speaks out.

      • Paul 33.1.1
        6 October 2014 at 6:18 pm

        It is very interesting that this raid happened after the election.
        Now if we had a media worth anything, they would be questioning the timing of this raid.
        But we don’t. We have a bought, compromised and corporate media pumping out propaganda for the owners of this country..

      • Chooky 33.1.2
        6 October 2014 at 6:21 pm

        +100 weka

  34. xanthe 34
    6 October 2014 at 5:55 pm

    blue leopard you are correct labour and greens bought into and promoted the “distraction”. I believe that was the major ethical and stratigic blunder that cost the election. I wonder if their review will examine this!

  35. Richard 35
    6 October 2014 at 6:04 pm

    Are people surprised, like WTF?

    That was a foreshore that one, Soon as it died down key was bound to go after the blokes that got his pet troll(JC) sacked.

    They won’t raid Slater or anyone else, why would they upset there pets.

    Of course it’s disgusting that’s what National are.

  36. xanthe 36
    6 October 2014 at 6:13 pm

    they should have stood for what was fair. they didnt thats why they lost votes they had to accept that dotcom was here and that he was being delt to unfairly. they should have accepted the reality and supported justice. they lost their moral compass and so lost the plot.

    • blue leopard 36.1
      6 October 2014 at 6:19 pm

      Exactly

    • karol 36.2
      6 October 2014 at 6:27 pm

      Actually, I think it was the timing and the unexpectedness of the release of Dirty Politics that was a problem. Labour and the Greens didn’t get into playing it up so much. They tried to keep on with their campaigns, talking policy etc, while also making some measured statements about Dirty Politics. If anything, they just weren’t sure how to deal with it while they were in campaign mode.

      I think Labour and the Greens had long accepted that Dotcom is here and had been dealt to unfairly.

      I always thought Dotcom taking such a leading role in setting up a new party, at such short notice was a bad move. KDC got carried away with his won ego. He just couldn’t stay in the background. I note he has been relatively quiet since the MoT – realised he was being too much of a distraction.

      • weka 36.2.1
        6 October 2014 at 6:38 pm

        +1

        +1

        +1 (hope he is still learning and doesn’t just give up)

        • karol 36.2.1.1
          6 October 2014 at 6:42 pm

          I think it’s important that Team KDC continue to fight against the disservice done to KDC by the raids on his mansion, the confiscations of his stuff, and the attempt to extradite him to the US.

          • weka 36.2.1.1.1
            6 October 2014 at 7:01 pm

            KDC’s first interview since election.

            http://torrentfreak.com/kim-dotcom-breaks-post-election-media-silence-141004/

            “The Internet Party failed to deliver meaningful change in New Zealand at the last election because of the media spin by our opponents,” Dotcom says.

            “They have successfully turned me into a villain, a German Nazi, a horrible employer, a political hacker, a practitioner of prohibited digital voodoo magic and nothing short of a monster. I would hate that guy too if I didn’t know that it wasn’t true.”

            While I think this is very true (Iheard so many people disliking him on the basis of what they saw in the MSM), I am surprised at his surprise. Did he not think this was how it was going to play?

            Also the lack of acknowledgement of the IP’s mistakes (beyond brand KDC being toxic, which he blames on others).

            Karol, “I think it’s important that Team KDC continue to fight against the disservice done to KDC by the raids on his mansion, the confiscations of his stuff, and the attempt to extradite him to the US.”

            Yes, and I hope he doesn’t give up on NZ too. The money, influence, passion and intelligence are still useful if he learns how to channel it in ways that work for NZ culture.

      • Colonial Viper 36.2.2
        6 October 2014 at 6:54 pm

        If anything, they just weren’t sure how to deal with it while they were in campaign mode.

        Innate conservatism (sticking to the campaign plan at all costs, despite events severely outdating it) and inability to innovate and adapt.

  37. Paul 37
    6 October 2014 at 6:21 pm

    A lot of Slater and Ede’s mates on this site today.
    Are they sent here because it is realised this is a potentially damaging story?

  38. ExStatic 38
    6 October 2014 at 6:24 pm

    Rawshark is bullshit, just a smokescreen and a diversion a lot of people who should know better bought into.
    Live by the sword, die by it. Hager has let himself be used and will lay the price.

    • Hanswurst 38.1
      6 October 2014 at 6:30 pm

      Here’s some bullshit, just a smokescreen and a diversion a couple of people who should know better might buy into.

      fify.

    • Colonial Viper 38.2
      6 October 2014 at 7:01 pm

      You shouldn’t throw away outstanding independent investigative journalists like Hager. When they disappear, so will our democracy.

  39. Anne 39
    6 October 2014 at 6:24 pm

    Just seen it on TV1 and I’m enraged. Enraged that the police do that to Nicky Hagar and leave the real criminals, Cameron Slater, Graham Carrick, Simon Lusk, Jason Ede, Kathy Odger – and John Key by association – alone.

    Twenty years ago I went to the police to seek their help about criminal activities being conducted against me (mentioned it before I know) and they treated me like crap. They conducted no investigation because there was a military component.

    Anyone who thinks the NZ Police are not hopelessly compromised and biased at best… downright corrupt at worst… is living in Cloud Cuckoo Land!

    • Chooky 39.1
      6 October 2014 at 6:34 pm

      +100 Anne

    • lurgee 39.2
      6 October 2014 at 7:39 pm

      Sorry, but what crimes have Slater, Graham, Lusk, Ede and Odgers committed?

      If you have evidence of a crime, report it to the police.

      Though I suspect you are just frothing.

      Rawshark committed a crime. No-one denies that. It was (probably) in the public interest but it is still a breach of the law. A complaint appears to have been made and the police are investigating it.

      That is not controversial.

      What may be controversial is the enthusiasm with which they have gone about the job. A bit like Slater’s OIA requests, this one seems to have been suspiciously expedited.

      • Anne 39.2.1
        6 October 2014 at 8:08 pm

        Read the book “Dirty Politcs” mate?

        I”m getting heartily sick of this pathetic whining “Rawshark committed a crime.” Do you rwnjs only have half a brain that can only visualise half a story? Slater has committed crimes in the past. He has harassed/intimidated/received stolen goods/ hacked into a political party’s computer and helped himself to sensitive financial information concerning that party’s members. He was helped to do all these things by the above named. He’s lied, cheated and committed slander against innocent individuals, yet some how in your retarded rw brains you can’t conceive of him being a criminal?

        • lurgee 39.2.1.1
          6 October 2014 at 9:22 pm

          We had this conversation just the other day. Do you have any sort of response other than”Have you read the book” and insults?

          http://thestandard.org.nz/robertson-announces-that-he-is-standing-for-leader/#comment-899970

          Where have I said that Slater should not be prosecuted for crimes, or is not a criminal? That’s a completely invented, random claim on your part. Rather tiresome, irrational behaviour on your part.

          I pointed out that Rawshark committed a crime. Not even Rawshark, or Hager, deny that. It was (probably) in the public interest but it is still a breach of the law. A complaint appears to have been made and the police are investigating it. That’s how it works.

          • Colonial Viper 39.2.1.1.1
            6 October 2014 at 9:34 pm

            You’re being quite disingenous.

            The police are never going to get around to investigating let alone prosecuting, Slater, Lusk, Farrar etc.

            Why is this? Well, for the same reason that Hager has been fucked over. Political pressure from the PM, his staff, his office, whatever.

            • lurgee 39.2.1.1.1.1
              6 October 2014 at 9:42 pm

              Slater seems to be spending quite a lot of time in court these days. Not always on the prosecution side.

              My response was to the comment, “I’m enraged. Enraged that the police do that to Nicky Hagar and leave the real criminals, Cameron Slater, Graham Carrick, Simon Lusk, Jason Ede, Kathy Odger [sic]”.

              I wanted to know what crimes these people are supposed to have committed. In terms of breaching Section 764d, sub-paragraph iv, clause b sort of stuff. Not just yelling “criminals” because they are people we don’t like who behave in nasty behaviour.

              Simply being nasty, stupid and rightwing isn’t illegal, sadly.

            • Murray Olsen 39.2.1.1.1.2
              7 October 2014 at 4:09 am

              I’m not sure the poaka need pressure from Key’s office. As the uniformed branch of NAct, they know instinctively what is required.

          • framu 39.2.1.1.2
            7 October 2014 at 7:48 am

            “Where have I said that Slater should not be prosecuted for crimes, or is not a criminal?”

            right about here perhaps?

            “Sorry, but what crimes have Slater, Graham, Lusk, Ede and Odgers committed?
            If you have evidence of a crime, report it to the police.
            Though I suspect you are just frothing”

            most people will read that as you suggesting they havent commited a crime

            • lurgee 39.2.1.1.2.1
              7 October 2014 at 8:31 am

              When I posted “what crimes have Slater, Graham, Lusk, Ede and Odgers committed?” I was asking Anne to back up her claim that the police were targeting Hager and leaving: “the real criminals, Cameron Slater, Graham Carrick [sic], Simon Lusk, Jason Ede, Kathy Odger [sic]” unmolested.

              Calling other people criminals just because you dislike them and what they do is silly at best, and possibly defamatory at worst, unless you can actually show how they have broken the law.

              The first comment, “Where have I said that Slater should not be prosecuted for crimes, or is not a criminal?” was in response to Anne’s claim that “in your retarded rw brains you can’t conceive of him being a criminal”. I’m quite capable of conceiving that. I just don’t see what it had to do with the matter on hand, which was about specific crimes relating to Dirty Politics that several people were alleged to have committed.

              • framu …
                7 October 2014 at 8:50 am

                fair enough – but one statement did follow the other – so its not that far off for people to assume

                but then theres that old saying about assuming things 🙂

      • Richard 39.2.2
        6 October 2014 at 8:23 pm

        Sorry Lurgee

        But Conspiracy to use OIA information for personal gain or financial benefit would be a start I would have thought.

        • lurgee 39.2.2.1
          6 October 2014 at 9:28 pm

          If the information can be made available to the public, it can, presumably, be used by the public in whatever way they see fit. Nothing like that in Parker’s complaint.

          http://thestandard.org.nz/about-those-other-police-complaints/

          If you can think of law has been broken, make a complaint about it. But if the Shadow Attorney General can’t pin them down for “Conspiracy to use OIA information for personal gain or financial benefit” I don’t think it is a crime.

          • Colonial Viper 39.2.2.1.1
            6 October 2014 at 9:36 pm

            You corruption facilitating piece of shit. It’s how information was declassified and when/why it was released which is the issue. You’re good at this game though, admittedly.

            PS It’s a long time since Parker has practiced any law seriously.

            • lurgee 39.2.2.1.1.1
              6 October 2014 at 9:50 pm

              You corruption facilitating piece of shit.

              You say the sweetest things.

              Was the information declassified and released in an actually criminal manner? If so, it should be a slam-dunk for a complaint. But their actions need to be actually violating a statute. You can’t be legitimately charged with speeding because the police don’t like the colour of your car. You actually have to be driving too fast.

              Anne is calling people “criminals” without actually saying what crime has been committed.

              I’m just disgusted by the silly hysterical gibbering. It is making us all look silly and possibly obscuring the real issues. We got all frothy and upset when John Key blathered about Hager being a left wing conspiracy nut and; but people are indulging in the same sort of loose language here.

              People are actually setting up the straw men for the right to attack – “They’re calling us criminals and saying the police are doing this out of politically motivated malice!” At least leave it up to the Farrars and Slaters to do that.

              • Colonial Viper …
                6 October 2014 at 10:06 pm

                All around the world, “western liberal democracies” are rewriting laws and procedures to enable the most bullshit, venal, self serving practices against the public good and against democratic due process.

                With people like you giving cover by saying “oh its not against any law.” Fucking weasel. Of course it’s not, its one of the privileges of being able to write the laws, then selectively enforce them.

                • Murray Olsen …
                  7 October 2014 at 4:21 am

                  She/he does sort of have a point,CV. The things they did are filthy, and I’m pretty sure they would have veered into criminality. Right at this moment, though, I’m too tired to think of exactly where and how. I suspect taking stuff from Labour’s computers could be criminal, but a conviction would need a prosecutor who was interested in the argument and not eager for much of a future career.

                  Collins may have broken some acts in handing out official information. It looks like Slug Boy knew about the Goff thing before his OIA request was approved. Someone probably broke the law there. Blackmailing Hide would be an offence, but the alleged victim says it never happened. Conspiracy to blackmail an MP is still a fairly serious offence. Ngati poaka could invetsigate that.

                  There you go, lurgee, just off the top of my head.

                  • lurgee …
                    7 October 2014 at 7:34 am

                    He, for the record.

                    The problem is that we can disapprove of behaviour without it being a breach of the law. But keep in mind, this cuts both ways. It is frustrating that there is no clear statute that defines leaking information, expediting OIA requests or being Cameron Slater as illegal. But one day that similar lack of be useful for the left. In a more moral and less self-serving way, of course.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      7 October 2014 at 12:04 pm

                      thing is, you don’t come across as “disapproving” of undemocratic behaviour. In the slightest. But rather as an apologist for undemocratic behaviour.

                • lurgee …
                  7 October 2014 at 7:27 am

                  With people like you giving cover by saying “oh its not against any law.” Fucking weasel. Of course it’s not, its one of the privileges of being able to write the laws, then selectively enforce them.

                  So you agree a crime has not been committed and Anne’s claim that Cameron Slater, Graham Carrick, Simon Lusk, Jason Ede, Kathy Odgers were criminals? Thank you.

                  There has been no allegation of actual criminal behaviour by them. Supremely amoral, nasty, besmirching, discreditable, and (for some) job losing behaviour.

                  But actually criminal?

                  In our dreams. The best we’ve got going just now is Slater’s tussle with Blomfield, which serves as an ironic parallel to Hager’s situation. But other than the similarities between the cases, Slater-Blomfield has nothing to do with Dirty Politics and (unless something truly bizarre is revealed) nothing to do with the other people Anne mentioned.

                  • Tracey …
                    7 October 2014 at 12:09 pm

                    Maybe fraud in cases where carrick paid slater to post material in slaters name but written by graham…

                • lurgee …
                  7 October 2014 at 7:27 am

                  With people like you giving cover by saying “oh its not against any law.” Fucking weasel. Of course it’s not, its one of the privileges of being able to write the laws, then selectively enforce them.

                  So you agree a crime has not been committed and Anne’s claim that Cameron Slater, Graham Carrick, Simon Lusk, Jason Ede, Kathy Odgers were criminals? Thank you.

                  There has been no allegation of actual criminal behaviour by them. Supremely amoral, nasty, besmirching, discreditable, and (for some) job losing behaviour.

                  But actually criminal?

                  In our dreams. The best we’ve got going just now is Slater’s tussle with Blomfield, which serves as an ironic parallel to Hager’s situation. But other than the similarities between the cases, Slater-Blomfield has nothing to do with Dirty Politics and (unless something truly bizarre is revealed) nothing to do with the other people Anne mentioned.

                • lurgee …
                  7 October 2014 at 7:40 am

                  With people like you giving cover by saying “oh its not against any law.” Fucking weasel. Of course it’s not, its one of the privileges of being able to write the laws, then selectively enforce them.

                  So you agree a crime has not been committed and Anne’s claim that Cameron Slater, Graham Carrick, Simon Lusk, Jason Ede, Kathy Odgers are criminals is hyberbole? Thank you.

                  I don’t recall any suggestion in Dirty Politics of of actual criminal behaviour by them. Supremely amoral, nasty, besmirching, discreditable, and (for some) job losing behaviour.

                  But actually criminal? There are a couple of tenuous things in Parker’s letter. But lets face it, if Ede GOES DOWN for using a dynamic IP address (is that even illegal?) it will seem a bit anti-climactic. A bit like Capone being jailed for tax evasion.

                  Beyond that, the best we’ve got going just now is Slater’s tussle with Blomfield, which serves as an ironic parallel to Hager’s situation. But other than the similarities between the cases, Slater-Blomfield has nothing to do with Dirty Politics and (unless something truly bizarre is revealed) nothing to do with the other people Anne mentioned.

                  MODS – please delete two versions above. This one edited slightly for clarity.

          • Richard 39.2.2.1.2
            7 October 2014 at 6:42 am

            So what your saying is..in effect. If national want to release public information to discredit an opposition party, it’s fair. as it’s public information.

            Cool glad I know where you stand on that.

            Glad to know you support such devious and unethical tactics, confirms my suspicion National supporters are the lowest pieces of fucking shit on this planet.

            Prepared to insight murder on anyone who objects to their ideology.

            Turd polisher.

            • lurgee 39.2.2.1.2.1
              7 October 2014 at 7:17 am

              No, that’s not what I’m saying at all, you fool.

              I’m saying there is no point running around calling people criminals unless you can actually show that a crime has occurred. If you can’t, you’re just defaming people. You’re only little bit of Dirty Politics.

              I have not said it it is ‘fair’ for anyone to release information to discredit an opposition party. The point I was making, in response to your earlier suggestion that “Conspiracy to use OIA information for personal gain or financial benefit” would be a crime. My first point was that it isn’t a crime to use information made available through the OIA for gain; once it is made available, it can be used in anyway the recipient sees fit.

              As for the ‘conspiracy’ angle, I’m not sure collusion between beehive staff, ministers and bloggers amounts to a crime, though perhaps someone with knowledge of the law in that area could say. It might be abuse of office, and dishonest, but I don’t think I recall Hager suggesting an actual crime was committed. That’s why sententious phrases like “Conduct unbecoming of a minister” exist.

              And National supporter? 2002 – Alliance. 2005 – Alliance. 2008 – deliberately spoiled my ballot. 2011 – Mana. 2014 – Greens.

    • Once Was Tim 39.3
      6 October 2014 at 8:19 pm

      @ Anne:
      I’m curious to know whether you’re keeping a tally and details when you encounter them (I am). In my experience under our corporatised PS, the senior management involved in running their little fiefdoms are usually to blame – and sometimes because of nudge nudge wink wink political influence.
      I like to think that at some stage in future when we actually get a return to democracy, some of these people will be held accountable and properly penalised – it appears to be the only way this sort of behaviour can be discouraged.
      I know the reaction from the anti-democrats will be that it is a ‘witch hunt’.
      From memory, I think it may have been you that had gone through the employment court – (like me), where the CEO accused me of all sorts of things which were easy to prove to be untrue. Indeed I genuinely felt embarassed for them. Interestingly, the media at the time termed the fiefdom’s actions as a witch hunt – which went down like a cup of cold sick amongst very arrogant lying senior managers. I was also at pains not to use evidence (or as minimal evidence as possible) in order not to embarass them – because the peon public servants were doing a damn fine job (despite a culture of fear, political influence and general troughing). My bottom line in the settlement was that there would be NO confidentiality agreement.

      I’m trying to refrain from making comments on social media (the likes of fis and others are truly depressing knowing they’re often incapable of logic and any critical analysis, however I remember what some people from the diverse Indian community said to me recently – and that was/is that corruption is almost as rampant here as it is in India – it’s just ‘under the table’ and various corporatised structures have allowed that to happen. And what they don’t seem to realise is that when it becomes really rampant, it backfires on the corrupt – often in nasty ways. The corruption manifests itself here in SO many ways: whether its giving out private information to mates or trying to legitimise a politician’s position; tendering processes; manipulation of departmental budgets; nepotism and contracting practices; the list is endless.
      I imagine (though I’m not a supporter of the ‘right of centre’ BJP) that had Congress won the last election, the consequences would be dire – the result of ingrained corruption (as above) built up over time. I see no reason why that can’t happen here – the corrupt usually become smugger and ‘untouchable’ masters of the Universe – till it all turns to shit.
      We’ve discussed our PS before I think – a few weeks back maybe but its completely evident that after 30 or so years, its restructure has done the EXACT opposite of what was promised.

      I’ll likely refrain from further comment for a while – its just that there are a couple of things that really irk – one is the state of the PS, which is not down to public servants, but rather the CEOs and senior management, AND the state of public service broadcasting and our electronic public sphere (which I also belive can be quite easily resurrected when we return to democracy (rather than elected dictatorships)

      • Anne 39.3.1
        6 October 2014 at 8:42 pm

        No, I never went through the employment court procedure Once was Tim. I was too cowered and frightened at the time after a long period of criminal harrassment and intimidation. Some of it was conducted at an ‘official’ level and some of it wasn’t. I had been a whistle blower a couple of years earlier and I suspect that was the reason why the police didn’t investigate the criminal content. In fact they joined in the harassment for a while but that’s another story.

        • Once Was Tim 39.3.1.1
          6 October 2014 at 8:53 pm

          Ah OK.
          As it happens, I was instructed by Snr Managment NOT to call the police (strange when one came across serious criminal activity). I’ve no wish to relitigate, but should any of the accusations re-emerge, there’ll be a few home truths that show utter hypocrisy, breaches of various Acts, embarrassing emails legitimately obtained on the basis of being instructed to take copies for ‘offsite backup’ purposes, management competency and so on.

          Pleased its all worked out for you. We both know there are various scams going on involving things like immigration; private tertiary institutions and so on.

          Back to Hobbitville – the trolls there are just funny rather than frustrating me with their UTTER stupidity despite lprent’s valiant efforts.

          [lprent: I don’t try to eliminate them. I just try to keep the rabbits down to an acceptable level. Why would I spoil the fun. ]

  40. Matthew Hooton 40
    6 October 2014 at 6:26 pm

    Does anyone know if the police have followed up the Acting Leader of the Opposition’s complaint of 1 September?

    Letter is here: http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/raw-data-david-parkers-letter-police-commissioner-ck

  41. Whateva next? 41
    6 October 2014 at 6:30 pm

    I wonder how many copies of dirty politics were sold? Raiding Hagar is shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted, or do the books all have tracking devices on?

  42. Tiger Mountain 42
    6 October 2014 at 6:32 pm

    Some have speculated that the seized drives will likely have been cloned and be with the NSA or similar as we consider this. So the NZ Police may not technically have actually ‘examined’ them. Sort of like the PMs office dealing with stuff.

    This appears to be an intimidation exercise that all journalists and bloggers and blog posters should have a good think about how to react to.

    • marty mars 42.1
      7 October 2014 at 8:22 am

      “This appears to be an intimidation exercise that all journalists and bloggers and blog posters should have a good think about how to react to.”

      Yes this is one of the really important bits of this dirty raid. I wonder if any nz tickboxes have been ticked recently.

  43. feijoa 43
    6 October 2014 at 6:39 pm

    National were quick off the mark when Dirty Politics came out ( Labour too slow)
    and National managed to frame the whole thing their own way- somehow it ended up with Labour being the bad guys (left wing smear)

    There is only one opinion in this country – and it’s John Key’s

    • Paul 43.1
      6 October 2014 at 6:43 pm

      Do remember when you say that National were able to frame the story their way.
      The media writes their script and amplifies their message.
      Gower, Hosking, Henry, Christie, O’Brien, Vance etc are not independent media voices.
      The Herald, Fairfax Media, ZB support National.

  44. Realblue 44
    6 October 2014 at 6:42 pm

    It got 60 seconds on the news. I guess if you use stolen property for financial gain, it’s a crime by definition. The alternate view is that it’s in the public interest. I don’t know if the law says that’s ok or if it’s a defence or not. Clearly a complaint must have been laid. I guess if it was my property( IP) which someone then passed to someone else and that person made money from it , Id be pissed off and would lay a complaint. Given the lack of impact the book had, I think most NZers would think ‘meh’.

  45. Richard 45
    6 October 2014 at 6:45 pm

    You know when nothing is being done about such serious things as leaking of servants details and attempts to get someone killed by HK Chinese criminals and OIA leaks, that you have lost democracy, anything goes when your in power, and we are all expendable in the grand scheme of keeping National in power.

    Hagar should be knighted for bringing us the truth of our democracy, pity the blue tinted spec wearers out there can’t bear to hear it.

  46. Marksman33 46
    6 October 2014 at 6:47 pm

    Is it just me or is Mike one of the thickest trolls we have had on here, man the standard of trollship is certainly going down hill fast.

    [lprent: I’d noticed. But we have seen this before.

    This is 2008 trolling by the fools from the whaledreck site. I find that I can usually improve the commenting standard with some judicious pruning.

    I used to go through quite a lot of boxes of these wee rings a day at one lambing season.

    But this Mike hasn’t triggered my anti-trolling instincts yet. Several others have. ]

    • Richard 46.1
      7 October 2014 at 7:07 am

      Wouldn’t mind docking a few trolls myself lprent, Pass the rings and hold em steady..

  47. Realblue 47
    6 October 2014 at 6:50 pm

    Yes thanks Paul, but I’m not that paranoid so I think with a rational lens. Probably the MSM again eh ?

    • Paul 47.1
      6 October 2014 at 6:56 pm

      So you think our media is a reliable source of unbiased news?
      Great.

    • Richard 47.2
      6 October 2014 at 7:14 pm

      @ Realblue

      So the relentless attacks from O’Sullivan and Armstrong happen to national too do they?

      I’ve had a hard day so excuse the tone of this but please…

      FUCK OFF.

    • politikiwi 47.3
      6 October 2014 at 7:17 pm

      Actually, looking at it with a rational lens you would see that the lessons of history being repeated here: Time and again this sort of power grab has ended badly for the masses.

      There’s no paranoia. Just seeing patterns which connect.

  48. Chooky 48
    6 October 2014 at 7:05 pm

    ‘How was raiding Nicky Hager’s home for 10 hours so important?’

    By Martyn Bradbury / October 6, 2014

    “In NZ, John Key can do whatever likes and NZers love it. We are a cargo cult minus the cargo…

    – See more at: http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/10/06/how-was-raiding-nicky-hagers-home-for-10-hours-so-important/#sthash.TxVCKvLe.dpuf

  49. kiwisaver 49
    6 October 2014 at 7:43 pm

    The trouble is we’ll get mad and jump up and down about it for a while, then have to get up and go to work in the morning, and then watch our favourite show
    on telly, or sport or whatever, and we’ll forget all about it.
    I used to blog a lot on the Herald, but I now realise it’s a waste of time and I told them so. The endless corporate slanting and the failure to investigate the Rawshark emails, were too depressing.
    This blog and Scoop and others could be a viable alternative if it could be done somehow. I’d be willing to donate to it.
    This country is now a police state run by Mr Key and I never thought I’d say that.

    • RedBaronCV 49.1
      6 October 2014 at 8:30 pm

      Please don’t give up kiwisaver. We do know that Nact takes endless counsel from focus groups and the like so we need as many people as possible to focus on child poverty, arrogant Nact’s etc so perhaps we can train them to move in specificed directions.
      Also do remember that the parties left of Nact didn’t have much money for the election (pretty much all locally sourced I suspect unlike the overseas money that Nact seem to be awash with) and sod all favourable publicity or sensible discussion of their policies from the MSM. Despite that, even in Clutha-Southland which has to rate as heartland Nact, just under 40% of the voting electorate managed to go to the booth and vote for a party on the left of NACT.
      Expressing contra opinions does help people feel not so alone. Notice how the Herald doesn’t have comments on the Nicky Hager raid open.

      I’m suggesting that anyone who can, and I know many cannot, give a small donation to the party(s) of their choice and volunter to help where possible but not at the risk of your job etc. And maybe we try for some way to gather up left postings? Next stop local body elections, turn Local Government left.

    • CnrJoe 49.2
      6 October 2014 at 10:04 pm

      kiwisaver – u blogged? on th herald u say ?
      really, no

  50. RedBaronCV 50
    6 October 2014 at 7:45 pm

    5 Officers searched for 10 hours=50 hours ? Assuming Nicky has just an average home they must have taken the place apart and dug up the garden too.

    Funny how the police cry shortage of resources when dealing with burglars, can’t seem to get the roast busters charged, don’t bother to arrest for DV, don’t bother to enforce protection orders for the safety of children , but look at how much spare resource they have for this. FFS.

  51. dad4justice 51
    6 October 2014 at 8:05 pm

    Surely the keystone cops have heaps of real crime to solve?

  52. Dobby Bloggs 52
    6 October 2014 at 8:23 pm

    Imagine if someone hacked the Standard’s editors and then Slater “somehow” came in possession, put his spin on it and published them. You lot would be the first to call for a police raid.

    [lprent: It is unlikely to happen. I know of at least three confirmed times (and more on an anecdotal basis) that Cameron Slater has been hacked in the last seven years. His site was apparently pretty wide open when he was on Drupal and it isn’t much better now.

    It hasn’t happened to this site because I’m :-

    1. Not a lazy sloppy whiner like Cameron Slater. I test changes for security issues, read the incoming security dispatches assiduously, and update rapidly after testing.
    2. Pretty paranoid and I limit the possible entry points and make sure that they are blocked from any usual kinds of attack or from people being able to get too much data.
    3. I’m a programmer who already spends a lot of time thinking about how to prevent people breaking into the systems I write code for.
    4. I also have custom programs trolling my logs looking for the telltale signs of people trying to hack the site so I can react to it rapidly.

    We do get periodic security breaches when features get added. There was one just a week ago. But we usually find them before anyone else does.

    So the issue has never arisen. What I was most incredulous about was that Cameron wasn’t aware that he’d been hacked. But I am unsurprised. It is quite feasible to gulp download his entire site overnight if you chose to do it, and I know of several people people who have done it. He appears to wear no protection (somthing for his sexual partners to watch out for I suspect). ]

    • RedBaronCV 52.1
      6 October 2014 at 8:33 pm

      Why would they bother, what we post is what you get. Or are you accusing us of laudering someone else’s dirty washing?

      • Dobby Bloggs 52.1.1
        6 October 2014 at 9:09 pm

        Not accusing you of hiding anything. The point I’m making is Slater had his emails hacked which is in the public interest according to most commentators on this site.
        I’m just curious what the reaction would be here if some right wing journalist published a book on hacked Minto or Bradbury emails. I’m just saying a crime is a crime regardless of what you think of the victim.

        • lprent 52.1.1.1
          6 October 2014 at 9:19 pm

          I’m just curious what the reaction would be here if some right wing journalist published a book…

          The law has specific exemptions for journalists based on public good – S68 of the evidence act on sources for instance. Judges can usually overturn those if they consider it is in the public good (and several other grounds) to do so. It isn’t an unqualified privilege.

          It is unlikely that there’d be much difference in attitudes from the left. There certainly wasn’t for Ambrose who was admittedly a bit of a right of centre journalist passing material to other journalists. I suspect after being on the receiving end of the right pack of mindless clobbers.

          Of course there is the slight issue that it is unlikely that any left-wing blogger would act as a complete sociopathic arseholes as Cameron Slater and his coterie of ‘friends’. I have certainly never run across anyone on the left with quite the same level of apparent moral depravity as was displayed by Slater, Collins, Ede, Odgers, Farrar, Williams, Key and others.

          It means that the scenario you have described is pretty unlikely. Especially in view with either Bomber (who periodically irritates me with his bombastic naivety, but who is personally pretty straight up) or John Minto (whose politics and tactics I disagree with, but who I have never heard of having any moral issues over the last 40 years that I have been aware of him).

          Does that answer your question? Or are you just (as I suspect) being a silly idiot mouthing someone elses idiotic strawman argument.

          • karol 52.1.1.1.1
            6 October 2014 at 9:22 pm

            But didn’t a judge rule against David Fisher protecting his sources for his Dotcom book – on the grounds that the book wasn’t journalism because the book was not published by a news organisation?

        • Richard 52.1.1.2
          7 October 2014 at 6:53 am

          If I found Bradbury and Minto were up to no good in their emails well in the public interest I wouldn’t have a problem with it.

          Though I doubt Minto would be up to much more than organizing a protest or ten. Or smoking the odd joint.

          Unlike National who currently have a list longer than a recidivist criminals record of suspicious , dodgy and outright scary deals aand doings that need serious investigating.

    • Colonial Viper 52.2
      6 October 2014 at 9:09 pm

      So what, dickhead. Because no matter what we called for, the police wouldn’t do it. Slater took all the details of Labour Party donors. No fucking action. You know why? Because that’s the political side the police and the SIS are on.

      • Scott1 52.2.1
        7 October 2014 at 7:23 am

        Maybe the Labour party should have pushed it harder.

        I guess they did not want to because it emphasized the lax security they had – but I think the “if i leave my window open it doesn’t mean you can steal my credit cards” argument works fine for that…

  53. timbo 53
    6 October 2014 at 9:02 pm

    As noted, this post has generated a lot of outrage from (mostly) RW commentators to the effect that Hager shouldn’t have used stolen emails. But there’s an interesting parallel here with the rule of evidence in criminal trials, by which illegally obtained evidence is not automatically inadmissible. The English law is particularly strong on this. It’s years since I thought about this stuff, but I vaguely remember an English case about a police sting to catch stolen property. They set up a fake jewellery shop, Stardust Jewellers, to catch those posing on stolen goods. There were problems with the evidence, but the entrapment was still valid, I think. From memory, NZ courts are not as lenient as English courts on this, but they will still allow the police to use illegally obtained evidence if the interests of justice require it. Or something.

    Strikes me there’s an interesting parallel with Hager. Most National voters would probably back the police right to use evidence obtained by entrapment. So why shouldn’t Hager be allowed to do the same, if the interests of justice require it?

  54. Jono 54
    7 October 2014 at 1:18 am

    This is not my country

  55. Once was Pete 55
    7 October 2014 at 4:00 am

    This was always going to happen, and I expect Hager was prepared for it and would not have kept anything incriminating onsite. A police complaint was made by Slater, Hacking is illegal and there is an inquiry about to get underway. Of course the police would have to go after the evidence, such as it is.
    It is as simple as that. There are already two legal rulings requiring authors to reveal their sources, and Hager cannot claim journalistic privilege on this as he did not check any of the allegations.

    • Murray Olsen 55.1
      7 October 2014 at 4:35 am

      “Hager cannot claim journalistic privilege on this as he did not check any of the allegations.”

      What a load of shit, straight from Whalespew. Hager reported on emails. What are the allegations you speak of? Hager reported on material that came into his possession. He’s a journalist, not a bloody judge. What annoys me are that so many Kiwis seem to believe the sort of shit you’re trying to pass off as wisdom.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 55.1.1
        7 October 2014 at 8:36 am

        As usual among the dim-bulbs, not only are they swallowing propaganda by the spoonful, they are quite happy to go along with mutually contradictory proposals, and none of them have read the book.

        Their “tough on crime” posture is revealed as the lie it always was, as they demand witnesses be punished and perpetrators walk free.

        The malevolent criminals who manipulate their emotions this way pose a genuine, clear and present threat to New Zealand’s national interests, and they will not stop until someone stops them.

  56. Once was Pete 56
    7 October 2014 at 4:45 am

    Instead of getting angry, stand back and think a little. There is no objective evidence about the veracity of those emails. That is what journalists do- check and recheck that all the information is valid. So far all we know is what is written in the book. This may be true, it may be the full story, or it may not. Nothing is ever the way it seems at first glance. Your comment about not being a judge is just drivel.
    Once a complaint was laid it was almost automatic that the police would act. It is aftyer all a very significant issue. If it was in the public interest to publish the book, it is definiotely in the public interest to know the full story, whatever that is.

    • felix 56.1
      7 October 2014 at 6:10 am

      “There is no objective evidence about the veracity of those emails.”

      Slater disagrees. As do the Police.

      Think it through, pete. The emails are either fake or they’re stolen but they can’t be both.

      • bearded git 56.1.1
        7 October 2014 at 6:54 am

        Agreed felix.Nobody with credibility has disputed that the emails are true. I’m not counting Slater and Crusher here of course.

        Key for instance has to my knowledge never questioned their veracity, just the conclusions drawn.

        Where is Jason Ede?

      • Draco T Bastard 56.1.2
        8 October 2014 at 7:23 pm

        The emails are either fake or they’re stolen but they can’t be both.

        The RWNJs completely missed that point when Don Brash declared the emails in Hollow Men stolen. It’s a distraction: National yells Stolen and their puppets in the MSM and the RWNJs lap it up and ignore the fact that if they were stolen then they must be true and that the corruption shown must also be true.

        The distraction works because the people reporting the corruption buy into it and the people who National want to vote for them don’t simply want to look into the truth revealed. It’s massive act of willful blindness but a fairly large chunk of our society.

    • framu 56.2
      7 October 2014 at 7:53 am

      “Once a complaint was laid it was almost automatic that the police would act”

      yet theyve only bothered with slaters complaint – funny that

    • lprent 56.3
      7 October 2014 at 8:07 am

      There was extensive checking done before the publication of the book. I helped with putting people in contact with other people. We’d long known what kinds of things were going on. We had just never had any proof of how much of an arsehole that Cameron Slater and his friends were.

      It just wasn’t done with the arsehole perpetrators. That was because they already had a port of redress if the material was wrong. The courts.

      Is that what you are offended by. That the arseholes of the local blogs and their puppet masters in National and corporates weren’t warned?

      Idiot. If Cameron Slater or Odger or Ede or anyone else wants to challenge the veracity of the emails and the conclusions of the book, then all they have to do is to use the courts. It is called a defamation suit.

      You’d have to note that they don’t appear to be using it?

      Of course they will then be up for cross examination and discovery motions. I can understand why that isn’t something that they want to face.

      • Bob 56.3.1
        8 October 2014 at 2:53 pm

        “It just wasn’t done with the arsehole perpetrators. That was because they already had a port of redress if the material was wrong. The courts.”
        Is that how you like to see journalists work? Recieve some stolen emails, take a one sided, attack minded view on them with no right of reply, and if it is all bullshit then go to court and try to prove a negative to clear your name? Even though by the time that has happened you have already been found guilty in the court of public opinion!
        Fuck me LPrent, I thought you were in a bad mood (see infused’s 16 week ban), but have you lost all sense of what journalism is supposed to be, and the repercussions of your proposed style of reporting?

        To give you some perspective, by this theory you would have been happy for the media to jump to the conclusion that David Cunliffe was behind Karen Price’s tweets and they were colluding to eventually out several potential Labour leaders as the sources of a range of Whaleoil’s stories that had been leaked from within Labour. Actually, fuck it, why not just out Karen Price as Rawshark?
        It’s okay that I have no proof for any of this, they can lay a deformation suit and attempt to prove me wrong (somehow) if they don’t like it, in the mean time this story can stay front page of every news site in the country.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 56.3.1.1
          8 October 2014 at 2:59 pm

          Much as Blomfield has had to, and Slater has failed to, in court.

          I wonder why Blomfield’s attempt is succeeding and Slater’s didn’t…

          Jeez that’s a toughie, no wait, I’ve got it: judges are all Dotcom-funded Communists!

          • Bob 56.3.1.1.1
            8 October 2014 at 3:57 pm

            Are you saying that you agree with lprent that the courts should be used to clean up journalism? Fuck journalistic integrity, we have defamation laws if you want a balanced, fact based story written.

            Are you confused about your own stance?

            Here read this, http://thestandard.org.nz/dirty-kiwiblog/#comment-898138 then read your comment above and tell me, do you want journalists to talk more, or less bullshit?

            • Draco T Bastard 56.3.1.1.1.1
              8 October 2014 at 7:28 pm

              That’s actually a big reason as to why we defamation laws – so that journalists and their employers can be held accountable.

              • Bob …
                9 October 2014 at 11:25 am

                I agree with you there Draco, but what you seen to be missing is that both lprent and OAB are suggesting that journalists should not have to do any research prior to printing a story, just find something that sounds plausible, print it with no balanced research, and if they are completely wrong the courts will sort it out. Is that how you want journalists to operate? Would you be happy if the Karen Price example I gave above was front page of the Herald?

                [lprent: Not the case. What they have to do is research, but not the type that you stupidly think has to be done, apparently on the basis of some half-arsed US fictional TV court dramas.

                There is no requirement in any kind of journalism to give prior warning to the targets of a piece. I have no idea where you got this strange idea from…

                There is an obligation to check the veracity of the information. Remember that what he was checking was that the emails and logged files were in fact correct. There was an outside non-subjective source for that – the various blogs and their history. I suspect that on his hard drives there will be almost complete copies of the entirety of the public face of Whaleoil, Cactus Kate, Kiwiblog, and other sites that were used fro veracity.

                Hager did a lot of that, but he also got his legwork people to talk to people involved in the political and commercial questions indicated by the emails and other documents.

                Didn’t know what the source was at the time, but I happily helped direct to people and told them to just give up their info with no questions asked.

                Essentially, you are being a fool. Hager might get interpretations a bit screwy, but the factual basis of his books is always solidly verified. ]

                • Pascals bookie …
                  9 October 2014 at 11:38 am

                  What do you mean by ‘have’ to?

                  Do you think it should be a requirement in law?

                  • Bob …
                    9 October 2014 at 11:55 am

                    “What do you mean by ‘have’ to?” To research material to make as sure as you can that it is factual ahead of printing potentially incorrect and damning information that could ruin someones life/career? I definitely think it should be best practice at the very least!

                    For this reason I personally support both the Blomfield case against Slater, he should be held to account for potentially ruining a guys career without (from my understanding) even attempting to balance the story.

                    • Pascals bookie …
                      9 October 2014 at 12:03 pm

                      The fact of the emails and messages existence and content are not in dispute. Hager knew who got them and how and why. Done.

                      Quibbling about whether or not Slater was just fibbing or whatever doesn’t need to be in the work about the messages, it can and did come later.

                    • Bob …
                      9 October 2014 at 12:10 pm

                      That is an indictment on you, Hager and all of the journalists of his ilk. It actually makes me sick that people tollerate gutter journalism, especially while half the commentators on this site then complain about biased journalism during the election.

                      If you want good journalism you have to hold journalists to account, you are obviously happy with the status quo, I can tell you I am not.

                    • wekarawshark …
                      9 October 2014 at 12:27 pm

                      How exactly have you been holding other journalists to account?

                    • Pascals bookie …
                      9 October 2014 at 12:34 pm

                      Cool story bro.

                  • Pascals bookie …
                    9 October 2014 at 11:56 am

                    see here, for example, (there are many other places you could read up on this stuff)

                    You should always offer the right of reply when making allegations. However, there will be some cases where this rule needs to be checked with senior editorial colleagues.

                    If, for example, you uncover information that you consider to be in the public interest and involves serious allegations against an individual or group, it might not be appropriate to approach those who are the focus of the piece of investigative journalism. This is particularly important if the information could lead to criminal arrest.

                    http://www.mediahelpingmedia.org/training-resources/editorial-ethics/239-fairness-in-journalism

                    It’s not cut and dried. there are no hard and fast rules. Making them hard and fast would limit the freedom of the press.

                    • Bob …
                      9 October 2014 at 12:14 pm

                      This just points out shit journalism is taught from the start.

                      “This is particularly important if the information could lead to criminal arrest. ” Hager teaches this shit, he should have known he was going to get raided, the information is right there in the information he likely provides!

                    • Pascals bookie …
                      9 October 2014 at 12:33 pm

                      lol, I dont think you understood it.

                      They say you needn’t give a right of reply prior to publication in cases where the subject may face legal action due to what is revealed.

            • Pascals bookie 56.3.1.1.1.2
              8 October 2014 at 7:42 pm

              NIce one Bob.

              But tell me, what point would there have been in approaching Slater first to ask about the various stories in the book?

              He has had weeks now to put his side of it, and there doesn’t really seem to be one’ other than that Hager is a lefty blah blah not a journalist whatever, and that what he (Slater) says in the emails and messages is just lies.

              His claim as far as I can tell is that he is a liar, so why whould we believe he is telling the truth now?

              And given that he was approached by Danyl to get his side of the story for a new book being written about the whole mess, and publicly declared he won;t talk to him, why would he have talked to Hager?

              It’s all just bullshit mate. Slater is running any damn line he can to keep his faithful little idiots in the farm, end of.

              • Bob …
                9 October 2014 at 11:43 am

                “But tell me, what point would there have been in approaching Slater first to ask about the various stories in the book?”
                To offer a response to the emails so Hager can then either produce further information to make him out to be a liar, give his side of the story in the book so the reader can make up their mind, or dispell any emails he has taken completely out of context rather than put himself in danger of a defamation suit.
                It has the added bonus of giving Slater a chance to put in a cease and desist order, the courts can then decide if the information is in the public interest (as Hager states) ahead of time rather than being raided after the fact like what has happened.

                See how journalism is supposed to work? With checks and balances ahead of time, rather than rushing a book to the printing presses without due process, so you can get in ahead of an election, then complain when you are pulled up for potentially unlawful activity. Forgive me if I don’t feel sorry for the man.

                [lprent: Why? Hager had the actual entire websites to peruse to see if what was said in the emails etc was in fact what happened. It is clear in the book (have you read it yet? it sounds like you are arguing from a complete lack of knowledge) and in the subsequent rawshark releases, that Hager took great care to verify what could be verified.

                You think that having a known lying dimwit like Slater trying to bluster his way out of it would have added to the book and the presentation of facts in any way?

                You just sound like you are mindlessly spinning with bothering to have read either the book or anything apart from Cameron’s stupidity. ]

                • Pascals bookie …
                  9 October 2014 at 11:51 am

                  What? That makes no sense. All of those things have had weeks to play out, and we’ve seen how they play out. Exactly the way you would expect.

                  Cam’s repsonse has been to cry about lefty this and biased that, and claim that the messages are fake (false) or that he was just telling lies to his mates.

                  Meanwhile, the minister of justice has resigned pending one inquiry and others are most probably coming down the track. And there have been zero filings of defamation regarding anything Hager said.

                  The book is about the emails. They already have Slaters side. Right there in his own words. If Hager had left out messages that show a better side to what was going on, Slater could have quite rightly, and easily, shown Hager up for being a hack by releasing the messages that Hager was removing from the story.

                  But he hasn’t. Face it, the only ‘other side’ here is spin, and journos are under no obligation to include that in their own work. There is ample opporunity for Slater et al to repsond. Amazingly, many of them just went silent. Which speaks volumes.

                  • Bob …
                    9 October 2014 at 12:07 pm

                    “The book is about the emails. They already have Slaters side. Right there in his own words. If Hager had left out messages that show a better side to what was going on, Slater could have quite rightly, and easily, shown Hager up for being a hack by releasing the messages that Hager was removing from the story.”
                    So by this logic you would support the GCSB having access to everyone’s emails as you can get full context just from reading an email trail? There are never any inside jokes, back stories or mindless rants that go on in emails, everyw word can be taken completely at face value? Of course you wouldn’t, the issue is, under our weak defamation laws, Hager can take all of these emails at face value and write his ‘honest opinion’ on what he ‘thinks’ they are talking about and Slater has no recourse shy of proving those opinions to be demonstrably false. That is near impossible to do if there are any inside jokes or back stories involved.

                    “But he hasn’t. Face it, the only ‘other side’ here is spin, and journos are under no obligation to include that in their own work. There is ample opporunity for Slater et al to repsond. Amazingly, many of them just went silent. Which speaks volumes.” Because he stated they are his emails, that means he has almost zero recourse other than a police complaint about the hacking of his site. I can’t believe you are sticking up for this piss poor journalism, you are effictively sticking up for Slater in Blomfields case against him!

                    • Pascals bookie …
                      9 October 2014 at 12:23 pm

                      Nope. Utter fail on all counts.

                      The main allegations aren’t based on inside jokes or anything else.

                      The Minister of Justice didn’t resign over a misinterpreted joke.

                      And honest opinion will only get you so far, Slter isn’t a politician, he is a private citizen so the Lange case wouldn’t apply. Hager’s statements seem to be reasonable based on the facts of the emails. Slater’s claims that he was just lying and big noting seem to be a stretch given what else we know. Sure he is a blow hard, but the facts are that he was asking around sex workers looking for dirt on people, and campaigning against the head of the SFO on behalf of a ‘client’, and all the rest of it.

                      The Blomfeld case is different in that, as the judge said, it appears to be a personal vandetta with no public interest element.

                      And the GCSB thing is juts weird. The analogy there would be to the hacker right? Who everyone agrees broke the law and will and should face sanction if he is caught.

                    • lprent …
                      9 October 2014 at 12:54 pm

                      Because he stated they are his emails, that means he has almost zero recourse other than a police complaint about the hacking of his site.

                      Nope. You’d have to be a blind fool to think that.

                      The core of Blomfields case is essentially that, despite the volume of material that Cameron had to work with, Cam resorted to simply deliberately and malevolently lying about facts on Blomfield. No reasonable person (ie not the slobbering idiot readers at whalescum) would have taken the published documents and come to the interpretation that Cameron used.

                      Unfortunately for Cam, Hager used his own words to condemn him. Indeed Hager was kind. The rawshark dumps showed that Hager was very careful to only use what he could verify through what got published on the right websites. Any reasonable person could possibly argue with Hager’s interpretation, but it’d be bloody hard to argue that the facts didn’t support his interpretation as well.

                      He certainly didn’t make any facts up to support his book in the way that Cameron did in his posts on Blomfield. It is the difference between a professional investigative journo like Hager, and a half-arsed lazy scumbag yellow ‘jonolist’ like Slater. I am pretty sure that is the way that any court will see it as well.

                • Pascals bookie …
                  9 October 2014 at 12:06 pm

                  And what potential unlawful activity has Hager been pulled up for?

                  That’s slander mate, have you checked with hager for a response to this slur? Have you even read moderately about the issue to get informed? Clearly not.

                  I know you aren’t a journalist, but you are still making comments in a public forum.

                  • Bob …
                    9 October 2014 at 12:22 pm

                    My god, read up around defamation laws before making potentially slanderous remarks yourself.
                    “potential unlawful activity” means just that, there is the potential that unlawful activity may have occurred, the police would likely not have raided his house without the potential for unlawful activity occuring. This has not be proved, therefore it is not yet classed as unlawful activity, hence it is ‘potential unlawful activity’.

                    You directly calling me out for slander with no proof of such can be percieved as a slanderous act (suggesting I have broken Defamation law when I clearly have not).

                    No wonder you are so confused over this whole issue, read the law! Perhaps if you do you will understand why I believe checks and balances should be put in place prior to an article/book being written rather than after the fact.

                    [lprent: You are incorrect. In case you hadn’t realised, slander and defamation on this site are the purview of the site. Don’t raise them unless you want me to check. Do it too often for dumbarse and ill informed accusations and I will remove the nuisance wasting my time. You very nearly got one for this stupid comment. ]

                    • Pascals bookie …
                      9 October 2014 at 12:25 pm

                      So what potentially unlawful thing has Hager done?

                      The police aren’t claiming he has done anything illegal.

                    • Bob …
                      9 October 2014 at 12:40 pm

                      You would need to ask the NZ Police what their intentions were in raiding his house, I wouldn’t want to speculate on what potential illegalities may or may not have have occured.
                      Although I could speculate through an editorial in the Herald explaining my honestly held opinion, then it would be fine, if I was wrong we have defamation suits to sort that out. That’s how you like your journalism done aye?

                    • Pascals bookie …
                      9 October 2014 at 12:47 pm

                      Grow a spine mate. You said Hager was “pulled up for potentially unlawful activity”.

                      Your words, which you claim aren’t in anyway defamatory. So come on.

                      I”m saying that your comment there was bullshit, that Hager was not pulled up for any potentially unlawful activity, and that you should be careful about slandering people given the high horse you are riding around on.

                      Those were your words, not the police’s, so why should I ask the police about them?. The Police have already explicitly said Hager is not a suspect for anything. So what were you talking about?

                    • Bob …
                      9 October 2014 at 1:09 pm

                      “lprent: You are incorrect. In case you hadn’t realised, slander and defamation on this site are the purview of the site. Don’t raise them unless you want me to check. Do it too often for dumbarse and ill informed accusations and I will remove the nuisance wasting my time. You very nearly got one for this stupid comment”
                      I am guessing from the content of your comment, it was in fact aimed at Pascals Bookie here: http://thestandard.org.nz/police-raid-hager/#comment-906902

                    • Pascals bookie …
                      9 October 2014 at 1:13 pm

                      Nah bob, I was wanting him to check.

                      Now what potentially unlawful activity were you refering to?

        • lprent 56.3.1.2
          8 October 2014 at 6:37 pm

          Is that how you like to see journalists work? Recieve some stolen emails, take a one sided, attack minded view on them with no right of reply, and if it is all bullshit then go to court and try to prove a negative to clear your name? Even though by the time that has happened you have already been found guilty in the court of public opinion!

          If that is the standard set by the glorious morality of Whaleoil, then who are you to argue..

          Ask Blomfield what he has had to do without having the great John Key arse protector lowered over Slater (ie calling the cops out on his friend behalf).

          That is actually how the law operates. I am pretty sure that the police will have problems sustaining this warrant in the courts, especially since they grabbed everything. I’d expect it will have to go to the high court.

          • Bob 56.3.1.2.1
            9 October 2014 at 11:17 am

            “If that is the standard set by the glorious morality of Whaleoil, then who are you to argue.. ”
            So you are now classing Whaleoil as a journalist and using him to set the bar for journalistic integrity? You really are fighting a losing battle here!

            “Ask Blomfield what he has had to do without having the great John Key arse protector lowered over Slater (ie calling the cops out on his friend behalf).” From my understanding Slater is currently in front of the courts regarding the Blomfield information, I am unsure of whether the police raided his property or not because I think he is aware of the Streisand effect, if he had been raided then crying to the media about it just makes you a larger target, now presumably this process is happening to Hager.

            “That is actually how the law operates. I am pretty sure that the police will have problems sustaining this warrant in the courts, especially since they grabbed everything. I’d expect it will have to go to the high court.”
            As Karol pointed out to you on Monday, does NZ law even cover Hager as a journalist? http://thestandard.org.nz/police-raid-hager/#comment-905363

            • Pascals bookie 56.3.1.2.1.1
              9 October 2014 at 11:35 am

              Geddis covers this:

              http://pundit.co.nz/content/the-case-for-and-against-nicky-hager

              Good stuff in comments too.

              eg:

              First off, the Dotcom case (involving an attempt to get information from David Fisher) isn’t quite on point. It involves the Privacy Act, which has a different definition of “news activity” and “news medium” to that used in the Evidence Act. So even if that judgment is correct in its interpretation of the Privacy Act (something that there’s been quite a bit of debate about), it isn’t quite on point.

              • lprent …
                9 October 2014 at 1:11 pm

                You notice these morans seem to spend all of their time trying to reinvent NZ legislative and common law basic legal principles from something they have seen in US TV programmes?

                Haven’t they worked out yet that the US split from English common law in 1776, and that the US legislation after 1776 had little relevance for UK and NZ law?

                • Pascals bookie …
                  9 October 2014 at 1:19 pm

                  Yep.

                  Whe one of their buddies gets got, they try and think of why it wasn’t ‘fair’ and then assume that it must of been illegal, or some sort of outrage, and if it isn’t illegal then that too is just a bigger outrage and you’d be a monsterr to think otherwsie.

                  And like you say, none of them have read anything.

            • lprent 56.3.1.2.1.2
              9 October 2014 at 1:17 pm

              As Karol pointed out to you on Monday, does NZ law even cover Hager as a journalist?

              *sigh* That was a privacy case. It is covered by a different law (Privacy Act) with different clauses, wording and interpretations to the Evidence Act.

              Tell you what. After the end of the month, you should be able to listen to Slater screaming how different the two acts are. I think that Blomfield’s privacy complaint will be dragging Slater back into court soon. And I suspect that Slater won’t like the results of the differences between the two acts.

    • Colonial Rawshark 56.4
      7 October 2014 at 5:29 pm

      Instead of getting angry, stand back and think a little. There is no objective evidence about the veracity of those emails.

      Au contraire. It appears that there is no objective evidence to your claim that “there is no objective evidence about the veracity of those emails.”

  57. Skinny 57
    7 October 2014 at 7:02 am

    It appears to me ‘someone’ is building a case against Hager now the dust has settled and the election is over. I would be pinning my bets that Chris Finlayson has been in touch with police command to prompt them along. The MSM are totally useless, they should be screaming from the roof tops that one of their own is being put under the pump!

    • amirite 57.1
      7 October 2014 at 7:15 am

      Hager is *not* one of their own. He’s a true journalist, not just a Government’s propaganda copy-paster.

    • BM 57.2
      7 October 2014 at 7:21 am

      The media is not untouchable, if Hager broke the law, he pays the price.

      • Skinny 57.2.1
        7 October 2014 at 7:53 am

        That is an assumption which is unjustified BM. Hager is a well respected investigative journalist who has been provided information from a source who ‘may’ have acted illegally. It is in the best interest of the public for example, when you have the Government abusing their power by the ‘totally unacceptable’ carry on surrounding the then leader of the opposition Phil Goff.

        The Crown should be building a case against the National Government administration and be offering Whale Dump immunity from prosecution for exposing corruption at the highest level. This is what should be going down my friend, not the nonsense going on currently.

        • BM 57.2.1.1
          7 October 2014 at 8:10 am

          That is an assumption which is unjustified

          Why’s that?, I would have thought you guys would be all about facts and processes, not about assumptions and feelings.

          • Skinny 57.2.1.1.1
            7 October 2014 at 8:56 am

            Not one of your brightest come backs BM. Your the one making assumptions that Hager has acted illegally cobber.

            Speaking of feelings, I put Key under the heat during the election campaign when he came to town. Watching him closely as the heat unfolded. He knew I did too and when I shook his hand and said ” polished performance John”, he knew exactly what I meant, that was ‘your putting on act and I’m on to you and most of your blue ribbon brigade here are not convinced of your preformance either.’ Guess who had the biggest smile, a smirk that has been a trademark that annoys opponents immensely 🙂

            • BM 57.2.1.1.1.1
              7 October 2014 at 9:07 am

              You missed the IF in my original post.

              I’m keeping an open mind about the whole thing, IF he broke the law then he has to pay the price.

              I’m not assuming he’s innocent because he’s a well respected investigative journalist

              Also I’m sure John Key appreciated your efforts, did he pat you on the head?

              • Skinny …
                7 October 2014 at 10:23 am

                Your presuming the opposite Dickhead as everyone can see!

                I sure deserved one, we had him on the ropes till dirty ole Bankie’s mate let him off the hook. Anyway it was a good hit for the local lad 🙂

      • thatguynz 57.2.2
        7 October 2014 at 1:32 pm

        Did you miss the part where the police said he was a witness, not a suspect?

        • Colonial Rawshark 57.2.2.1
          7 October 2014 at 5:32 pm

          I think BM is very keen for all the Lefties to be at the top of the list for a kicking, and if actions never gets down to the people in charge who have actually fucked up our democracy on tax payers dime, ah well.

  58. Jenny 58
    7 October 2014 at 7:21 am

    So what was the charge?

    Publishing information from illicitly aquired (hacked) emails?

    Why no raids on Cameron Slater’s house, do the police choose which political side to attack?

    Why no raids on the TV stations or Herald every time they report a revelation revealed by Edward Snowden?

    Is this next?

    As Nicky Hager himself said what could they possibly find at his physical home address?

    Is this just an intimidatory message to the rest of the media?

    • outofbed 58.1
      7 October 2014 at 7:45 am

      No this is just anintimidatory message to the rest of us.
      Anyway what makes everyone think they were looking for the rawshark stuff.
      Probably after what he has got on the spying agencies I would have thought

      • politikiwi 58.1.1
        7 October 2014 at 12:25 pm

        “Why no raids on Cameron Slater’s house, do the police choose which political side to attack?”

        That’s a rhetorical question, right?

  59. Once was Pete 59
    7 October 2014 at 8:57 am

    Iprent above. You may be convinced you know the substance of the issues, but the point is the wider public don’t, and calling me an idiot doesn’t change that. The public doesn’t know about context, wider content, or meaning until all the details are released and everything sees the light of day, and I am totally in favour of that.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 59.1
      7 October 2014 at 9:07 am

      No, you aren’t.

      If you were, you’d be defending Hager’s right to protect his source, rather than the self-confessed perpetrators of the crimes exposed.

      I say self-confessed because they confessed them: Slater to the High Court and the Prime Minister’s Office to the NZLP.

      So please, get up to speed before everyone notices you don’t have a clue what’s been going on, eh.

    • Murray Olsen 59.2
      7 October 2014 at 4:54 pm

      Once again, Nicky Hager wrote about the communications. He had a particular view of the interactions and that’s what he wrote about. If the filthy dogs that he exposed have explanations or wish to add other material, they are welcome to write their own books. Instead of this, they wrote the revelations off as a left wing smear campaign. The public can only know the wider context after inquiries and investigations. Hager is not a judge to be able to do this.

      Lprent calling you an idiot may not change anything, but it is accurately descriptive. I’d add bullshitter to it as well, if I were describing you.

  60. NeutObserver 60
    7 October 2014 at 9:10 am

    I recall when Hager released his “Dirty Politics” book he stated that he expected the Police to pay him a visit and accordingly he removed all evidence of who his sources were. So why the outrage from Hager now about the Police finally getting around to visit his house?

    • karol 60.1
      7 October 2014 at 9:14 am

      A lot of Hager’s concerns are about the way the police “visit’ was done. Hager wasn’t there, the search took 10 hours, and it was very intimidating for his family. It seemed to be a fishing expedition rather than a search for anything specific.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 60.2
      7 October 2014 at 9:22 am

      Perhaps you might be able to work that out by reading his statement.

      What are the odds? Ten to one against you being able to work it out?

  61. Rodel 61
    7 October 2014 at 9:30 am

    There doesn’t seem to be any outrage or even disinterested reporting in the MSM about the police raid on Hager’s home. Is it fear?

    • Anne 61.1
      7 October 2014 at 9:54 am

      Is it fear?

      Wouldn’t surprise me. Pathetic to the core. One or two of them may do so eventually but not until they think they’re safe from retaliatory action.

      Let me tell you from personal experience some of their other intimidatory practices.

      Slow driving past your home when they know you are there then speeding up again once they have passed. Slow driving past you when you’re out walking the dog, then speeding up. Speeding up behind you on a motorway until they are within inches of your back bumper and just sitting there for a while… then pulling out swiftly and racing away at breakneck speed – no lights flashing which I’m sure was illegal. Another ‘prank’ they would play on me was to park their car on one of Auckland’s coastal hills and wait for me to come around the corner with my dog. They would stare at me while I put the dog in my own car and drive off.

      Twenty years down the track, I still have nothing but the utmost contempt for them.

  62. KJS0ne 62
    7 October 2014 at 10:37 am

    The question should never be whether someone has something to hide or not, for the argument can be used to justify all kinds of invasions of privacy.

    I have emailed reporters without borders about my concerns regarding this raid on a journalist, and I encourage you all to do likewise, to at least ensure that New Zealand is waay down the list when the Press freedom index is published next:

    index@rsf.org is their address.

  63. reason 63
    7 October 2014 at 11:03 pm

    “So he pokes fun at dead children, engages in character assassination for cash, contacts prostitutes seeking information in order to blackmail or attack journalists, and colludes with ministers and prime-ministerial staffers to smear political opponents and innocent bystanders alike. None of this matters because Cameron Slater is a good bloke. He’s the sort of guy you can have a beer and a yarn with. Cameron’s a good story-teller. He’ll tell you about all the people he’s going to fuck over and all the lives he’s going to ruin, and how good it’s going to make him feel.”

    Its not right that people should know of slaters privately planned smears against others. Judith does not like it either.

    What goes on between slater , the national party and the other dirty ones should stay between them and their victims.

    That is why the police are involved.

    http://imperatorfish.com/2014/08/15/cameron-slater-is-the-real-victim/

  64. Snoopman 64
    11 October 2014 at 8:57 pm

    THANKS A MILLUN…

    NZ PM John Key’s Suppressed ‘Missing Million’ Voters Letter http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1410/S00029/john-keys-suppressed-missing-million-voters-letter.htm

    Originally published at:
    http://snoopman.net.nz/?p=2359

    The story behind the ‘scoop’:
    NZ PM Writes to ‘Missing Million’ Voters, “Thanks for not voting, loser”. http://snoopman.net.nz/?p=2371

Links to post