[Update] The News Corp scandal

[watzizname]

So what exactly is the suggestion here then, don't bring party politics into this thread, unless it's evenly distributed between New Labour, the Liberals and the Conservatives?

Seems a little defensive to me, given that Labour are no longer in power, where as the Liberals and Conservatives are..

The fact is, that Cameron's right to be in the highest office in the land, has been brought into question recently, and the only argument anyone defending him can seem to come up with is that they're all at it, so quit picking on him.

For the record.. I'm definitely not a Labour man, nor liberal and I'm certainly not a Conservative.. What I am is a realist, and as such am aware that it's probably always going to be these parties running / ruining our country.

What I want is an honest person in the top job, not someone who probably has to consult legal eagles and word-smiths before he dare answer questions about his well established association with people currently under investigation (I'm not singling anyone out here, Blair Brown and Cameron are all guilty of riding the Murdoch wave) even if the realist in me doubts it'll ever happen.

Flame away..

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Which is a total no-win and a complete honeypot question. Of course someone at News International at some point would have mentioned it to him, however as soon as he gives an inch and admits that the Labour party will take a mile in their obsession with trying to score points.

Still it means they can continue to avoid having any policies for a while longer so long as they can continue to get mileage out of this.

I'll repeat my previous comments on this issue, there are a number of extremely major issues ongoing in the country and the world, a judicial enquiry has been initiated, there is really nothing more to do with this other than political points scoring and mud slinging. Our law makers have far better things to do than the things Labour are trying to keep at the forefront. Truly a party with absolutely no policies right now, just a line up of attack dogs waiting for a new angle of attack. The country deserves far better from the opposition than the turgid pile of excrement that is the current Labour party. If they weren't so crap it may encourage the pretty lacklustre government to up their game.

In which case he is being deceitful.

In terms of point scoring, what was all that nonsense about Tom Baldwin then? That really was the cheapest points of all. As far as I am aware, neither Mr Baldwin, nor The Times, have been implicated in any of this. If that is the best defence they have then they need to be very worried indeed.

---------- Post added at 23:50 ---------- Previous post was at 23:26 ----------

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

Cameron has said he asked coulson if he had any involvement in the phone hacking and was assured by andy coulson he had played no part in it add to that the checks made on coulson clearly came up ok and cameron employed him. Of all the issues in this whole affair i cannot help thinking gettiing bogged down in andy coulson is letting a lot of other people off a very big hook.

Now cameron has come out and said he regrets hiring the guy and in hindsight wouldn't do it again what more do people want from him. I think we need to get back on point here and not keep getting distracted on this one issue that only exists because people want cameron's head on a plate whether it belongs there or not.

We have at least ten years of politicians relations with NI to cast an eye over and that period includes the tories and labour i personally want the investigation to get going fully get to the facts and whoever may have acted badly be shown and punished.

The problem is though, he keeps changing his story. First he didn't have that conversation, then he did, then it is Coulson might have lied.....what will be next?

The point of the concentration of the relationship Cameron has had with News International, goes beyond just he and Coulson. His constant refusal to answer questions, relating to conversations he might have had with these people, over the BSkyB bid, throws a very dark cloud over his integrity and judgement. Then there are all the warnings he was given, but he ignored them and employed the man anyway. There was sufficient evidence available to cast reasonable suspicion over his involvement, but this was ignored.

Cameron's provarication over what checks were carried out, is another question that remains unanswered. His refusal to provide details of those checks and the constant referral to, "basic checks carried out." Why only "basic checks?" Why not a thorough in-depth investigation of someone who would be within the "inner circle" of Downing Street? Especially after all the warnings that had been given. Basic checks are not afforded to the cleaner at Number Ten, let alone the communications director.

Surely you must see that they are very important points that need addressing. The Prime Minister of this country has been implicated as being complicit in the behaviour of those who have been alleged to have carried out criminal acts and refuses to give straightforward answers to questions about the depth of that involvement or complicity, that is most certainly something to be concerned about.

---------- Post added at 23:53 ---------- Previous post was at 23:50 ----------

Originally Posted by Chris

I always thought the Millipede would turn out to be a one-trick insect, and it seems as if we may just have seen it.

He landed a few good punches on Cameron over the past few days as regards Andy Coulson. The problem now is, he seems mesmerised by his own success and unable to do anything more than keep repeating it over and over again.

Unless any completely new information comes out that compromises Cameron to the point of resignation, Millipede needs to just get on with the job of opposition, reminding himself that the general election is still almost 4 years away and that no matter how much he might like to keep banging on about the News of the Screws, that election will be decided on the economy as it stands in 2015, not a political scandal from 2011.

Oddly enough, during the General Election campaign, I remember you admonishing others for making silly names out another party leader's name, I wonder what happened to that little bit of advice.

---------- Post added 21-07-2011 at 00:03 ---------- Previous post was 20-07-2011 at 23:53 ----------

Originally Posted by Sirius

That's is because Brown is not a conservative,

I seem to remember one of the admins or mods asking him not to drag party politics in to this thread and he seems to have ignored that as well.

And yet again, I have to point out at the only ones who are citing party politics, are those who are defending Cameron. From what I can remember, the only reference I have ever made on this thread, regarding the Tory Party, was raising a question about to what extent the elction campaign might have benefited from the hacking. But that would have been a few hundred posts ago. Whereas, there have been a multitude of posts criticising the Labour party.

"relating to conversations he might have had" Yes thats exactly it we do not know he had any real conversation about the bskyb bid we have plenty of people that want him to have had some so they can carry on screaming for his head right now but absolutely zero proof. Just to make it clear i am not interested in what cameron or any other politician says about their relations with the media i want facts, i want proof of their relstionships.

When those facts or proof come about trust me no matter who it is in whatever political party it might be i will call for their heads but not until then. Loathe as i am to remind some, this isn't just about politics\politicians normal people at the worst times of their lives were hit by this i couldn't really give a toss right now about politics i want the truth out and those responsible dealt with to the full force of the law.

Any political wrongdoing in all this will come out in due course and the necessary justice will come with it.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

"relating to conversations he might have had" Yes thats exactly it we do not know he had any real conversation about the bskyb bid we have plenty of people that want him to have had some so they can carry on screaming for his head right now but absolutely zero proof. Just to make it clear i am not interested in what cameron or any other politician says about their relations with the media i want facts, i want proof of their relstionships.

When those facts or proof come about trust me no matter who it is in whatever political party it might be i will call for their heads but not until then. Loathe as i am to remind some, this isn't just about politics\politicians normal people at the worst times of their lives were hit by this i couldn't really give a toss right now about politics i want the truth out and those responsible dealt with to the full force of the law.

Any political wrongdoing in all this will come out in due course and the necessary justice will come with it.

Yes l agree with that but remember David Cameron is prime minister which is the highest position in high office and as such the buck stops with him but he seems to be squirming around trying to avoid the truth.

---------- Post added at 05:40 ---------- Previous post was at 05:35 ----------

And it seems the newspapers do not believe him either.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion...t-2317653.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion...d-2317655.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...udgement-thing

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011...earance-checks

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ve-claims.html

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

In which case he is being deceitful.

In terms of point scoring, what was all that nonsense about Tom Baldwin then? That really was the cheapest points of all. As far as I am aware, neither Mr Baldwin, nor The Times, have been implicated in any of this. If that is the best defence they have then they need to be very worried indeed.

Not really, he's neither confirming nor denying. Labour politicians know very well what the truth is, and how utterly pointless the whole affair is.

This is about the behaviour of all the media now, that's why the investigation covers more than just NI. Sadly you can't just look at the behaviour of one small segment of the cohort to the exclusion of all else. That rather becomes a witch hunt.

Much as I dislike Cameron I'll repeat something that he said repeatedly yesterday - is there any evidence of improper behaviour by the ******* Coulson while he worked at #10?

If there isn't why are people banging on about him. If that's the best line of attack the opposition have we should all be very worried indeed. Hell we already have the one Labour guy pontificating about how he wrote to the PM to, err, recycle an anonymous allegation and then forget that he received a written reply to try and score a few points.

Ok to Flyboy.I'm traditionally labour inclined.

However in this case..Labour do not have any cleaner hands.If anything they are dirtier because MOST of the abuse by NOTW was done during their running of the government.
Dave has only been in office for a couple of years..So if there is going to be finger wagging from the public it's going to be pointing at Labour.This Labourite is certainly doing so anyway.

Party politics must be put aside on this issue.We need as a country to be united in getting to the bottom where ever it leads us and to set in place measures that do not allow the situation that led to it happening happen again.We need an ombudsmen/quango/committee with teeth and the ability to chuck offenders out of the profession who do not adhere to certain ethical practices.We need for corrupt police to be identified and prosecuted.But above all we need all politicians from ALL parties, involved in dealings with NI,NOTW and the Murdochs to be honest about their activities.

Cameron is just one of MANY who in hindsight behaved stupidly.

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Not really, he's neither confirming nor denying. Labour politicians know very well what the truth is, and how utterly pointless the whole affair is.

This is about the behaviour of all the media now, that's why the investigation covers more than just NI. Sadly you can't just look at the behaviour of one small segment of the cohort to the exclusion of all else. That rather becomes a witch hunt.

Much as I dislike Cameron I'll repeat something that he said repeatedly yesterday - is there any evidence of improper behaviour by the ******* Coulson while he worked at #10?

If there isn't why are people banging on about him. If that's the best line of attack the opposition have we should all be very worried indeed. Hell we already have the one Labour guy pontificating about how he wrote to the PM to, err, recycle an anonymous allegation and then forget that he received a written reply to try and score a few points.

Why is it, that those who are supporting Cameron in this, continue to harp on about Labour? I am being constantly accused of raising partisan issues in this thread, when I have merely asked one very relevant question, hundreds of posts ago, about the election. But here we are again, with yet another poster accusing the Labour governemnt of something that they are not being implicated in, other than not taking action when they supposedly could have. This is nothing to do with party politics, but you and others seem intent on making it so and then have the audacity to blame it on others.

The very reason why people are "banging" on about Coulson, is directly related to his being hired by Cameron, when he should have know full well what his history was. The fact that he was warned by several people (his refusal to neither confirm nor deny that serves only strengthens people's opinion of his complicity) of very real risks of being associated with Coulson, but decided to hire him anyway, raises even more questions: Why did he ignore the warnings? Who recommended the appointment? What was news International's involvement in Copulson's appointment and did Rupert Murdoch personally support it.

Then there is the involvement of Brooks, to consider: How close was her relationship with Cameron in respect of the BSkyB bidding process. What conversations took place relating to the bid and what other conversations occurred between Cameron and the rest of the News Corp executive?

There are many many more unanswered questions here, the very fact that the remain unanswered, is enough to raise suspicion that Cameron is hiding something.

---------- Post added at 11:11 ---------- Previous post was at 11:02 ----------

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Ok to Flyboy.I'm traditionally labour inclined.

However in this case..Labour do not have any cleaner hands.If anything they are dirtier because MOST of the abuse by NOTW was done during their running of the government.
Dave has only been in office for a couple of years..So if there is going to be finger wagging from the public it's going to be pointing at Labour.This Labourite is certainly doing so anyway.

Party politics must be put aside on this issue.We need as a country to be united in getting to the bottom where ever it leads us and to set in place measures that do not allow the situation that led to it happening happen again.We need an ombudsmen/quango/committee with teeth and the ability to chuck offenders out of the profession who do not adhere to certain ethical practices.We need for corrupt police to be identified and prosecuted.But above all we need all politicians from ALL parties, involved in dealings with NI,NOTW and the Murdochs to be honest about their activities.

Cameron is just one of MANY who in hindsight behaved stupidly.

But it is not me who is raising the issue of party politics. I have one single solitary post on this thread, where I have mentioned the Tory party, asking a very relevant question about the election, over four hundred posts ago. Yet we constantly see Cameron's supporters bringing this back to the Labour Party.

Cameron is at the very centre of this controversy. His involvement is pivotal to this whole saga. He is the one who hired Coulson, someone who he knew to have allegedly been involved in criminal behaviour, possibly on the recommendation, or orders, of Rupert Murdoch. His complicity can not be ignored.

[Osem]

After 13 years wining and dining with them, New Labour were so concerned about Murdoch's undue influence, phone hacking etc. etc. that they waited until they'd been booted out of office to try to do something about it. Odd that....

Originally Posted by Osem

After 13 years wining and dining with them, New Labour were so concerned about Murdoch's undue influence, phone hacking etc. etc. that they waited until they'd been booted out of office to try to do something about it. Odd that....

Not really.I'm sure the Tories would have done exactly the same.In fact as we aren't totally sure how far back the practice of phone hacking actually goes we can't be sure whom can say they are innocent.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Not really.I'm sure the Tories would have done exactly the same.In fact as we aren't totally sure how far back the practice of phone hacking actually goes we can't be sure whom can say they are innocent.

The at the end of my post is there to indicate a hint of sarcasm. We all know that they've probably all been at it to an extent but Milliband's 'holier than thou' crusade is cynical in the extreme. He's spent far more time in government dealing with the likes of Murdoch than those he's now pointing the finger at. When's he going to give us all a full and sincere apology for his party's role in all this and over a decade of govt. lies and spin?

Originally Posted by Osem

The at the end of my post is there to indicate a hint of sarcasm. We all know that they've probably all been at it to an extent but Milliband's 'holier than thou' crusade is cynical in the extreme. He's spent far more time in government dealing with the likes of Murdoch than those he's now pointing the finger at. When's he going to give us all a full and sincere apology for his party's role in all this?

What exactly would that role be? The demands for an apology from Cameron regarded his employment of Coulson, not a relationship with News International which Milliband has already conceded was a problem on their part.

I get what your saying, kind of agree. Both parties are to blame for the state we find ourselves in but presently only the current government can act on it.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Damien

What exactly would that role be? The demands for an apology from Cameron regarded his employment of Coulson, not a relationship with News International which Milliband has already conceded was a problem on their part.

What Cameron's been asked to apologise for is irrelevent to my point. Cameron's made an error the scale of which depends on what, if anything, Coulson is eventually proved to be guilty of.

Milliband's persual of brownie points with respect to Murdoch and the NOTW, however, would have a lot more kudos if it came from someone who wasn't a key figure in the govt. which spent years cultivating their own self serving relationship with those organisations and 'mysteriously' failed to follow up many of the issues which have now started to come to a head. That'd be his/their role in this and I for one would like it fully examined.

If Cameron's main mistake was taking a friend's word at face value that's one thing but IMHO it represents a very minor aspect of a very serious affair which stinks from top to bottom and implicates many other people far more than it does Cameron.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Why is it, that those who are supporting Cameron in this, continue to harp on about Labour? I am being constantly accused of raising partisan issues in this thread, when I have merely asked one very relevant question, hundreds of posts ago, about the election. But here we are again, with yet another poster accusing the Labour governemnt of something that they are not being implicated in, other than not taking action when they supposedly could have. This is nothing to do with party politics, but you and others seem intent on making it so and then have the audacity to blame it on others.

This is very about party politics. One party is insisting on dragging this to the forefront and scoring party political points. Where are all the quite pertinent questions regarding New Labour's ties to Murdoch and any undue influence back then? Exactly.

Originally Posted by Flyboy

The very reason why people are "banging" on about Coulson, is directly related to his being hired by Cameron, when he should have know full well what his history was. The fact that he was warned by several people (his refusal to neither confirm nor deny that serves only strengthens people's opinion of his complicity) of very real risks of being associated with Coulson, but decided to hire him anyway, raises even more questions: Why did he ignore the warnings? Who recommended the appointment? What was news International's involvement in Copulson's appointment and did Rupert Murdoch personally support it.

Did he do anything untowards while at #10. No? Indeed.

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Then there is the involvement of Brooks, to consider: How close was her relationship with Cameron in respect of the BSkyB bidding process. What conversations took place relating to the bid and what other conversations occurred between Cameron and the rest of the News Corp executive?

There are no questions here, Cameron has already said he wasn't involved in the BSkyB decisions and had no inappropriate discussions. Of course at some point someone at News International would have mentioned it to him, naive to think not. He's stuck in a difficult position as to acknowledge this would have people, like yourself, trying to score points off of it.

Originally Posted by Flyboy

There are many many more unanswered questions here, the very fact that the remain unanswered, is enough to raise suspicion that Cameron is hiding something.

Politicians on all sides of the spectrum are hiding something, I'm perfectly happy to say it, why don't you give it a try? If we're talking about Murdoch's approval it's noted he said the closest he has been to a politician recently was Gordon Brown as chancellor. There are multiple lines of attack on both sides.

There is nothing party political about acknowledging that all side of the spectrum come out of this dirty, concentrating on one side of the spectrum exclusively and ignoring the transgressions of the other veers towards political.

There's a financial crisis in Europe, and many other issues that require parliament time, and one side of the spectrum was busy trying to make hay and add more flames to a scandal that most people were getting rather tired of.

Relevant enquiries are underway, a begrudging apology from Cameron, an admisison he got it wrong, see what the investigations on both sides of the Atlantic discover and in the interim there's plenty enough to keep the politicians busy. 2 of the major parties have running the country to do, the other one can try coming up with alternatives to government policy.

Originally Posted by Damien

What exactly would that role be? The demands for an apology from Cameron regarded his employment of Coulson, not a relationship with News International which Milliband has already conceded was a problem on their part.

I get what your saying, kind of agree. Both parties are to blame for the state we find ourselves in but presently only the current government can act on it.

So Cameron should apologise for hiring somebody who has not been found guilty of anything, only charged? And he has stated that if Coulson is found guilty, he will come back and apologise.

What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Hugh

So Cameron should apologise for hiring somebody who has not been found guilty of anything, only charged? And he has stated that if Coulson is found guilty, he will come back and apologise.

What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

l am all for being ''innocent until proven guilty'' but if Andy Coulson is charged which l believe he will be in due time and found guilty then David Cameron will have to do more then apologise he will have to resign as the buck stops at the the top of the chain and not to some poor person further down the chain.