Verbal Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 The distortion of truth is everywhere in the media, the pressure of 24/7 news has made sensationalist journalism the norm All antique dealers sell crack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 1115: The last issue of the News of the World newspaper sold 3.8 million copies, up 1.1 million on the previous week, latest figures show. Surprise, surprise.....the great British public have spoken..... ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 I presume the Lefties are equally disgusted that Lord Ashcroft's personal details were targetted. As many people have already requested, please don't bring political point-scoring into this. For once I am in complete agreement with dune ()... it doesn't matter what your political persuasion is, nobody should be happy about bribery and corruption in our police / security services. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 All antique dealers sell crack. Arse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 As many people have already requested, please don't bring political point-scoring into this Agreed. Perhaps someone should drop an email to this chap to ask him to stop too: ed.miliband@labour.org.uk ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 All antique dealers sell crack. Lol, I wouldn't know crack if I sniffed it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Agreed. Perhaps someone should drop an email to this chap to ask him to stop too: ed.miliband@labour.org.uk ;-) Yes, Parliamentary scrutiny of this whole affair should stop forthwith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Lol, I wouldn't know crack if I sniffed it Just as the majority of journalists - including the one mainly responsible for breaking this story against the odds - are not hellbent on 'distorting the truth'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Yes, Parliamentary scrutiny of this whole affair should stop forthwith. is it scrutiny though? there wasn't mch of it leading up to getting RM's ear before the election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 is it scrutiny though? there wasn't mch of it leading up to getting RM's ear before the election. I refer your dealership to post no. 495. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Yes, Parliamentary scrutiny of this whole affair should stop forthwith. At least ask me to open wide before popping words in my mouth.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Just as the majority of journalists - including the one mainly responsible for breaking this story against the odds - are not hellbent on 'distorting the truth'. the pressure to get exclusives must be enormous. Whoever brought the story into the open was a good journalist. It must have taken a bit of guts to take on RM media machine. It is funny that the newspapers editors private lives have never been under the spotlight, unless they have been caught by the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 At least ask me to open wide before popping words in my mouth.... The problem trousers is that the assumptions are all yours. If Ed M says something critical of Coulson, it's ssumed by you to be a party-political issue alone. It's that partly - but there IS a wider and legitimate question of parliamentary ethics here. Coulson had already been exposed by The Guardian when Cameron took him on. Even Clegg had the momentary sense to see that at the time. So there are questions to be asked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 I refer your dealership to post no. 495. but surely if they are as upstanding to their principles they would not be so scared of RM at that time. It is hypocrisy to jump on the bandwagon now. (I expect any opposition party would do the same of course) It is political opportunism to start waving about something that was also being abused under his watch when he was in government. I don't care about which political party is right or wrong on this (all IMO were drinking from the trough) they were/are all desperate for power and sucking up to RM helped them get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 the pressure to get exclusives must be enormous. Whoever brought the story into the open was a good journalist. It must have taken a bit of guts to take on RM media machine. It is funny that the newspapers editors private lives have never been under the spotlight, unless they have been caught by the law. Yet. Posted that we should watch out for this to start not 30mins ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 but surely if they are as upstanding to their principles they would not be so scared of RM at that time. It is hypocrisy to jump on the bandwagon now. (I expect any opposition party would do the same of course) It is political opportunism to start waving about something that was also being abused under his watch when he was in government. I don't care about which political party is right or wrong on this (all IMO were drinking from the trough) they were/are all desperate for power and sucking up to RM helped them get it. I think you've got this the wrong way round Nick. It was opportunism to expect or hope for favours from Murdoch in return for a quiet or successful political life. Now that NI is no longer behaving as a vindictive state within a state, the real accounting of all the awfulness can and should begin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 As many people have already requested, please don't bring political point-scoring into this. For once I am in complete agreement with dune ()... it doesn't matter what your political persuasion is, nobody should be happy about bribery and corruption in our police / security services. Surely it is "political point scoring" to be disgusted by some investigating, but not when it concerns a "notorious tax-avoider", who just so happens to be a leftie bogeyman. Political point scoring is surely going onto the BBC, telling of your tears and distress over an incident that happened in 2006, yet in 2009 you attend the wedding of the person who caused such distress, and your wife invited the same person to spend a weekend at your holiday home, again after the event. Brown has never got over the fact that NI turned against him and he is now touring the TV studios, not because of some moral Crusade, or outrage (as Tom Watson has done), but on the basis of revenge. The whole episode has showed parts of the press in a terrible light, but it has also shown the hypocrisy at the very heart of this country. From the millions "appalled" at the behaviour of Murdoch's empire, whilst buying the Sun and watching Sky. To people like Steve Coogan, who happily take the millions on offer for starring in 20th Century Fox films. Add to that the audacity of some of Labour's good and great waging war against NI after attending weddings, parties and generally cosing up to them, makes me sick. Brooks admitted to parliament in March 2003 that the police were paid for information. No, action from a Labour Govt, no enquires, just wedding invites for Brown, Blair and Campbell. Lord Ashcroft issued a statement saying "In March 2002, Sir Nick Montagu, then the chairman of the Inland Revenue, wrote personally to me saying: “It is now clear that the caller was masquerading as you, and I am extremely sorry that we failed to spot as bogus someone who was able to give a reference number which matched your name and who displayed some familiarity with your tax affairs. Sir Nick referred the matter to the Information Commissioner and, a year later, I learnt from an investigating officer acting for the Commissioner that, in fact, five calls had been received by the Inland Revenue, between 9 and 14 February 2001, from someone who purported to be me. " Do lefties find this illegal act disgusting, or did he have it coming? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Lord Ashcroft issued a statement saying "In March 2002, Sir Nick Montagu, then the chairman of the Inland Revenue, wrote personally to me saying: “It is now clear that the caller was masquerading as you, and I am extremely sorry that we failed to spot as bogus someone who was able to give a reference number which matched your name and who displayed some familiarity with your tax affairs. Sir Nick referred the matter to the Information Commissioner and, a year later, I learnt from an investigating officer acting for the Commissioner that, in fact, five calls had been received by the Inland Revenue, between 9 and 14 February 2001, from someone who purported to be me. " Do lefties find this illegal act disgusting, or did he have it coming? Yes, it shouldn't happen, even to notorious tax avoiders who somehow are such nobs they nonetheless expect that they should have a strong say in how to run the country. But who exactly does that information identify? No one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 I think you've got this the wrong way round Nick. It was opportunism to expect or hope for favours from Murdoch in return for a quiet or successful political life. Now that NI is no longer behaving as a vindictive state within a state, the real accounting of all the awfulness can and should begin. without a doubt RM did not do it for nothing in return. He is a businessman and so you would expect that, the politicians? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Surely it is "political point scoring" to be disgusted by some investigating, but not when it concerns a "notorious tax-avoider", who just so happens to be a leftie bogeyman. Political point scoring is surely going onto the BBC, telling of your tears and distress over an incident that happened in 2006, yet in 2009 you attend the wedding of the person who caused such distress, and your wife invited the same person to spend a weekend at your holiday home, again after the event. Brown has never got over the fact that NI turned against him and he is now touring the TV studios, not because of some moral Crusade, or outrage (as Tom Watson has done), but on the basis of revenge. The whole episode has showed parts of the press in a terrible light, but it has also shown the hypocrisy at the very heart of this country. From the millions "appalled" at the behaviour of Murdoch's empire, whilst buying the Sun and watching Sky. To people like Steve Coogan, who happily take the millions on offer for starring in 20th Century Fox films. Add to that the audacity of some of Labour's good and great waging war against NI after attending weddings, parties and generally cosing up to them, makes me sick. Brooks admitted to parliament in March 2003 that the police were paid for information. No, action from a Labour Govt, no enquires, just wedding invites for Brown, Blair and Campbell. Lord Ashcroft issued a statement saying "In March 2002, Sir Nick Montagu, then the chairman of the Inland Revenue, wrote personally to me saying: “It is now clear that the caller was masquerading as you, and I am extremely sorry that we failed to spot as bogus someone who was able to give a reference number which matched your name and who displayed some familiarity with your tax affairs. Sir Nick referred the matter to the Information Commissioner and, a year later, I learnt from an investigating officer acting for the Commissioner that, in fact, five calls had been received by the Inland Revenue, between 9 and 14 February 2001, from someone who purported to be me. " Do lefties find this illegal act disgusting, or did he have it coming? Why are you using this issue to have a pop at 'lefties' (whoever they may be)? I haven't seen anybody throughout the course of this thread claim that hacking and deception is OK so long as the victim is on the opposite side of the political spectrum, but it appears from your posting that this is the picture you are trying to paint. I ask again - Why should an individual's political persuasion dictate whether or not they find hacking and corruption distasteful. This is an issue that has nothing to do with left or right, but right and wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Why are you using this issue to have a pop at 'lefties' (whoever they may be)? I haven't seen anybody throughout the course of this thread claim that hacking and deception is OK so long as the victim is on the opposite side of the political spectrum, but it appears from your posting that this is the picture you are trying to paint. I ask again - Why should an individual's political persuasion dictate whether or not they find hacking and corruption distasteful. This is an issue that has nothing to do with left or right, but right and wrong. Well said Rebecca. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 I ask again - Why should an individual's political persuasion dictate whether or not they find hacking and corruption distasteful. This is an issue that has nothing to do with left or right, but right and wrong. Whilst Murdoch's papers were Labour supporting nothing was said. Police were paid (admitted to Parliament in 2003) for information, phones were hacked (Clive goodman was jailed in 2007), medical records were obtained (Brown's son in 2006). This is what Ben Bradshaw said on Daily Politics "That was a discussion in the cabinet in the last year of the Labour government about whether to have a public inquiry . Gordon Brown had the added political difficulty that he was seen as a weakened Prime Minister. If we had gone down that route there would have been a hail storm not just from the Murdoch press but from all the other hostile media that we were just trying to find a diversion or an excuse" So the Labour cabinet, that included Ed Milliband decided against public enquiry for political reasons. Therefore, surely it is a political issue as well as a moral one, particulary when the people making this political decision are the ones doing most of the shouting against Murdoch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Why are you using this issue to have a pop at 'lefties' (whoever they may be)? I haven't seen anybody throughout the course of this thread claim that hacking and deception is OK so long as the victim is on the opposite side of the political spectrum, but it appears from your posting that this is the picture you are trying to paint. I ask again - Why should an individual's political persuasion dictate whether or not they find hacking and corruption distasteful. This is an issue that has nothing to do with left or right, but right and wrong. There are a few issues at play here, some of them cross party and some that do have a direct relation to one party. The idea that members of the Police Force (and other institutions) are susceptible to bribes is a cross party issue that we as a nation should be massively concerned over. The influence and power that NI and others have on our political, economic and social systems is also a cross party issue and one that both sides (maybe not the Lib Dems) have benefitted from. Additionally, both the main parties have shyed away from taking on NI both for fear of losing their influence and also for fear of then being targeted in retribution. However, IMHO, the Coulson issue is of direct relevance to the PM's (and his advisors and party's) judgement and should be quite rightly challenged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 There are a few issues at play here, some of them cross party and some that do have a direct relation to one party. The idea that members of the Police Force (and other institutions) are susceptible to bribes is a cross party issue that we as a nation should be massively concerned over. The influence and power that NI and others have on our political, economic and social systems is also a cross party issue and one that both sides (maybe not the Lib Dems) have benefitted from. Additionally, both the main parties have shyed away from taking on NI both for fear of losing their influence and also for fear of then being targeted in retribution. However, IMHO, the Coulson issue is of direct relevance to the PM's (and his advisors and party's) judgement and should be quite rightly challenged. I agree with all of this, and it is perhaps inevitable that Labour would take this point-scoring opportunity to attack Cameron and criticise his judgement. But I still don't see why anybody's views on the whole subject would or should be dictated by their political leanings, which appears to be the point that Lord Duckhunter is trying to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cat Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 (edited) I agree with all of this, and it is perhaps inevitable that Labour would take this point-scoring opportunity to attack Cameron and criticise his judgement. Of course it is. If the roles were reversed all the Tory MP's and voters would be doing the same. I think the point needs to be made though that when the original allegations were exposed none of the parties did anything about it. Why? Well they were all too scared. This wasn't just an issue for the Government to raise, it was one Parliament should have raised. However MP's of all parties were quiet on the matter. The article by Peter Mandleson in today's Guardian might go some way to explaining why: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/11/fear-labour-media-reform-pcc Edited 12 July, 2011 by The Cat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Of course it is. If the roles were reversed all the Tory MP's and voters would be doing the same. I think the point needs to be made though that when the original allegations were exposed none of the parties did anything about it. Why? Well they were all too scared. This wasn't just an issue for the Government to raise, it was one Parliament should have raised. However MP's of all parties were quiet on the matter. The article by Peter Mandleson in today's Guardian might go some way to explaining why: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/11/fear-labour-media-reform-pcc Mandelson has a nerve. The boundaries were pushed and when nothing was done they were pushed further, it was just like the bankers when Blair and Brown when they first came to office took away the Bank of England's powers to police them. A terrible mistake and they took the p###. The NI did the same as they felt (wrongly) they were almost above the law, as the politicians danced to their tune. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 I agree with all of this, and it is perhaps inevitable that Labour would take this point-scoring opportunity to attack Cameron and criticise his judgement. But I still don't see why anybody's views on the whole subject would or should be dictated by their political leanings, which appears to be the point that Lord Duckhunter is trying to make. I just find the hypocrisy of so many people over this issue nauseating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cat Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Mandelson has a nerve. The boundaries were pushed and when nothing was done they were pushed further, it was just like the bankers when Blair and Brown when they first came to office took away the Bank of England's powers to police them. A terrible mistake and they took the p###. The NI did the same as they felt (wrongly) they were almost above the law, as the politicians danced to their tune. Yes, nothing was done by all the parties. Not just the Governemnt. I don't remember the Tories standing up to argue against the relaxation of banking regulations, or hassling Labour into having Parliamentary discussions on the role of News International. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Yes, nothing was done by all the parties. Not just the Governemnt. I don't remember the Tories standing up to argue against the relaxation of banking regulations, or hassling Labour into having Parliamentary discussions on the role of News International. Which is why this should stay "non-political" at least on here. So much more still to come. Now Police think they have enough to interview Brooks & both Murdochs, rumours of more releases at 5pm today. Anyone taking a party line could end up looking stupid at best. What we have here is a classic old fashioned conspiracy to defraud, deceive and downright be illegal, followed by a classic cover up and a classic exposure. The interest remains in whether there could be conspiracies within conspiracies, not about who looks or comes out of it best for some moment in time Opinion Poll. FFS - appearances - that's one of the reasons that NI (and maybe others) went down this road in the first place. Political point scoring is petty at this time, there will be a lot more time for that once "The Whole truth" is out there (or a whole lot more than we have so far) - new leaders of Political Parties, New laws, People's lives and careers destroyed. This is NOT a party Political broadcast, it's a disaster for the UK of massive proportions. Get more facts THEN go hang the culprits from EVERY side, Media, Police, Politicians and Criminals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Agreed. It's beyond the playground politics of Lab vs Con. This could be Britain's 'Watergate'. Which is why I simply can't buy into this super-conspiracy idea that Murdoch is somehow orchestrating it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14118864 In the last couple of minutes it has been confirmed that the government will support Labour's motion that says MPs believe it would not be in the public interest for Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation to takeover BSkyB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14118864 In the last couple of minutes it has been confirmed that the government will support Labour's motion that says MPs believe it would not be in the public interest for Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation to takeover BSkyB. Have you thought about putting this on the NoTW thread as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Why do some of our neo-con posters see this as left v right? I don't get that at all. It's simply right v wrong. It's a chance for all politicians of all shade to break free from the undemocratic grip of NI and we should all be pleased about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Have you thought about putting this on the NoTW thread as well? No. Don't be ridiculous. FFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Agreed. It's beyond the playground politics of Lab vs Con. This could be Britain's 'Watergate'. Which is why I simply can't buy into this super-conspiracy idea that Murdoch is somehow orchestrating it all. I can buy into it. Murdoch has a lot more room to manoeveur. It's essentially a scrap between persistent autocracies, or large corporations as they are known and our relatively transparent form of Government. The tragedy is that in the search for the stories, the media has become the story, becoming pretty much everything that it is supposed to defend us from. Good democracies are underpinned by a strong press and sterling investigative journalism. The NOTW, and almost certainly other news outlets, have spied on private citizens in search of revenues, hurting the whole industry, and hurting our democracy in the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 I can buy into it. Murdoch has a lot more room to manoeveur. It's essentially a scrap between persistent autocracies, or large corporations as they are known and our relatively transparent form of Government. The tragedy is that in the search for the stories, the media has become the story, becoming pretty much everything that it is supposed to defend us from. Good democracies are underpinned by a strong press and sterling investigative journalism. The NOTW, and almost certainly other news outlets, have spied on private citizens in search of revenues, hurting the whole industry, and hurting our democracy in the process. You've missed one rather important point. It was the investigative journalism of Nick Davies and The Guardian that broke the story in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 You've missed one rather important point. It was the investigative journalism of Nick Davies and The Guardian that broke the story in the first place. No disagreement. Nevertheless, the reputation of the press as a whole has been tarnished. Time will tell whether Rusbridger and co were up to the same tricks, and questions have already been asked about an unofficial code of silence between media players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Why do some of our neo-con posters see this as left v right? I don't get that at all. It's simply right v wrong. It's a chance for all politicians of all shade to break free from the undemocratic grip of NI and we should all be pleased about that. To be fair some of the posters from the other side of the spectrum have as well. AS you say this is about right vs wrong not red vs blue etc. It really is the first opportunity that the politicians can have a proper go at the papers without too much fear of come back, at least in the short term. But they had better do it properly or they will have to keep looking over their shoulders for rest of their political lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 It'll be an interesting scrap if the politicians do go for the kill. The stockpiles of accumulated dirt must take up half of Wapping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 And still it goes deeper... http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/12/news-of-the-world-pinging Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Fairplay to Gordon Brown today - revenge is a dish served cold. Did anyone hear the senior police officer John Yates get a grilling today on 5 live in front of a selet commitee? Came across as very bent http://uk.news.yahoo.com/comment/talking-politics/gaping-mps-meet-met-dodgy-geezer-151432064.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Fairplay to Gordon Brown today - revenge is a dish served cold. Did anyone hear the senior police officer John Yates get a grilling today on 5 live in front of a selet commitee? Came across as very bent http://uk.news.yahoo.com/comment/talking-politics/gaping-mps-meet-met-dodgy-geezer-151432064.html I watched all the rozzers on the BBC website. They got a serious grilling and Hayman made Dellboy Totter look kosher! Clarke looked composed and answered everything in a honest and open manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 12 July, 2011 Author Share Posted 12 July, 2011 I watched all the rozzers on the BBC website. They got a serious grilling and Hayman made Dellboy Totter look kosher! Clarke looked composed and answered everything in a honest and open manner. I thought his massive over-reaction to being asked if he ever took money for information a tad dubious TBH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Quite impressive that the lasting impression of the evidence given by the police to the Select Committee today was that they were a bunch of incompetent, corrupt, lazy, wide boys (and girl). I'm sure that's the message they wanted to convey... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 I watched all the rozzers on the BBC website. They got a serious grilling and Hayman made Dellboy Totter look kosher! Clarke looked composed and answered everything in a honest and open manner. Oh yeah Yates was incompetent, and Hayman was admitting having regular meals with NI who he was supposed to be investigating. Coincidentally after the case is dropped he gets a cushy job working for them. You couldnt make it up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 And still it goes deeper... http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/12/news-of-the-world-pinging More bad news for the Police someone tweeted on Telegraph that more bad news was coming at 5pm - maybe this is the start of another direction. Ouch, on top of the Cops taking cash nightmare then you have the reason they would want to do it - so they get an exact location of where somebody is, then there are products available that will scan and find that number and bingo, not just voicemail hacked but your entire mobile conversations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 In a lighter moment, anyone see the Simpsons last night on Sky? Caused a bit of a stir today on Twitter http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/phone-hacking/8632272/Twitter-hilarity-as-Simpsons-poke-fun-at-Rupert-Murdoch.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franny Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 Oh yeah Yates was incompetent, and Hayman was admitting having regular meals with NI who he was supposed to be investigating. Coincidentally after the case is dropped he gets a cushy job working for them. You couldnt make it up! You are right and is no different to the various Labour ministers who cosied up to private industry when in power and as soon as they could took up lucrative postions with them - gone on since time began and will continue to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 You are right and is no different to the various Labour ministers who cosied up to private industry when in power and as soon as they could took up lucrative postions with them - gone on since time began and will continue to do so. Tories would never do that, No, not them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 12 July, 2011 Share Posted 12 July, 2011 You are right and is no different to the various Labour ministers who cosied up to private industry when in power and as soon as they could took up lucrative postions with them - gone on since time began and will continue to do so. Erm taking a bribe off someone you are supposed to be prosecuting not to do so is slightly different Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now