Missing Milly Dowler's voicemail "hacked by News of the World"

[ymu]

I don't care what dots you join. Don't tell me not to join others. Don't tell me to shut up because you have your priorities and that they override mine.

Don't put words in my mouth and I won't have to tell you to shut the fuck up you arrogant tool. I answered your question, you attacked me for doing so, and made up a load of nonsense in your head that I didn't say and then hijacked a great thread going on about it.

Not everyone thinks it's sensible to take on all the dominoes at the same time when they are set up to topple. It's your idiocy translating that into leaving the rest of the dominoes in place, no one elses's.

 

[dylans]

as to motivation, I'm informed by decent contacts @ The Guardian that their high command have taken a sharp dislike to Cameron, plus ideological differences (though the latter are minor, I grant you). As to the trap - it's being used now, I would say.
I certainly don't think Rusbridger did it to help Cameron, or out of any sense of nation al duty.

I really don't care what his motives were, I'm just glad he did it. If someone is kicking my enemy in the guts I am not too bothered who is wearing the boots.

 

[elbows]

Weird thing to say. Rusbridger helped Cameron - why? Is this a mental question? Is the reply that it doesn't matter right now good enough? It's not and it's not oh intrepid journos.

Its not a mental question, but the answer involves things that are fairly well known already.

The media is the fourth estate, this alone is almost enough to answer the question.

If you are in a position of power and responsibility, or are privy to very interesting information, then there are many opportunities for the weight of responsibility to produce internal conflicts between opposing goals, beliefs and forces. This can result in decisions that speak volumes about how things really are, what really counts, what forces will run roughshod over nobler aims. Usually the journey to the position of power will have provided plenty of opportunity to ensure that the person in question will 'do the right thing' and in particular a sense of loyalty to the nation on some level can be stretched a long way. Going to Oxford or Cambridge will also tend to increase confidence that the humanoid in question will be a safe pair of hands.

On a more general human level, not exclusive to those with some power and influence, knowing a secret or any information which could be of benefit to another can really heat up our brains. Whilst there are all manner of occasions on which people manage to keep their cards close to their chest, sometimes we end up with a burning desire to share information with others, including those affected, even if the consequences carry more personal risk than potential benefit.

Of course none of this in any way rules out other motivations that are specific to the situation & people involved, theres plenty of room for you to decide that he did it to help the Tories or the Lib Dems or whatever. I don't think there is anything wrong with dwelling on this stuff now, but at the same time I can see why people would be keen to focus on one target at a time, not fight on too many fronts at once in case the overall effort is undermined. This can be easier said than done, for some of us may question whether anything will really be solved if we ignore all the double-standards and hypocrisy that shows up along the way. We might be rather interested in the full reality of how things are, even if shining a torch into certain dark corners at the wrong moment causes the struggle to become fragmented.

 

[belboid]

Yes priorities. Cameron is the priority not the fucking Guardian, fool.

c'mon. If you got on Question Time, don't you think it'd be worth a one liner, after ripping into the whole of NI, along the lines of 'and wtf was Rusbridger doing giving Cameron that information, anyway?'

 

[smokedout]

I have a good idea, lets put that to one side and focus on attacking the paper that broke the story That seems like the most important thing to do right now, yeah.
FUCKING IDIOT.

I think it's a good idea, i'm bored of murdoch now, showing how the guardian editor acts against his pretend politics to chum up to tories could prove to be far more significant politically in the long term

 

[ViolentPanda]

I will concern myself with Rusbridger's motives once we have Cameron's head on a spike thanks and whichever way you want to spin this, attacking the paper that not only broke this story but doggedly followed it for years at a time when Cameron is in the sniper sights is just bloody stupid.

Doesn't that kind of ignore the possibility of Rusbridger having an unhealthy relationship with power, and therefore possibly acting to serve his own interests rather than those of his employers?

 

[butchersapron]

Don't put words in my mouth and I won't have to tell you to shut the fuck up you arrogant tool. I answered your question, you attacked me for doing so, and made up a load of nonsense in your head that I didn't say and then hijacked a great thread going on about it.

Not everyone thinks it's sensible to take on all the dominoes at the same time when they are set up to topple. It's your idiocy translating that into leaving the rest of the dominoes in place, no one elses's.

What words did i put in you mouth? Exactly what words? Oh empire smasher? As if your 'tactic mean fuck all. The only thing left to topple statues is new info and new investigation. But you say don't do that. It stops the massive investigation that is unstoppable.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Well, you seem to be asking what were his motivations?, and if the man himself isn't saying anything apart from what he's already said what have we got to go on? I did see him on Newsnight the other night, and AFAIR he was saying something along the lines of wanting to warn him about taking on a dodgy fella as his comms man. You can infer whatever you want from that, but it'll still be speculation.

Asking what his motivations were is a fairly simple question. Did he act to serve the people who pay his not inconsiderable salary, or did he act to serve the establishment he's part of?

 

[elbows]

I really don't care what his motives were, I'm just glad he did it. If someone is kicking my enemy in the guts I am not too bothered who is wearing the boots.

Its probably a good idea for futures sake that even if you don't try to stop the kicking, at least pay a little attention to the boots just in case they are one day stomping in your direction.

 

[butchersapron]

**

 

[TruXta]

Asking what his motivations were is a fairly simple question. Did he act to serve the people who pay his not inconsiderable salary, or did he act to serve the establishment he's part of?

Yes, it's a simple question and a good one, in case anyone didn't already get that. That's not the same as saying that answers to that questions, answers based on more than "gut feeling"/"I've read 300 years of British history"/"lizards", are forthcoming. Evidence, where the fuck is it?

edit - btw, there's no difference between his employes and the establishment, they are per definition one and the same.

 

[butchersapron]

Its not a mental question, but the answer involves things that are fairly well known already.

The media is the fourth estate, this alone is almost enough to answer the question.

If you are in a position of power and responsibility, or are privy to very interesting information, then there are many opportunities for the weight of responsibility to produce internal conflicts between opposing goals, beliefs and forces. This can result in decisions that speak volumes about how things really are, what really counts, what forces will run roughshod over nobler aims. Usually the journey to the position of power will have provided plenty of opportunity to ensure that the person in question will 'do the right thing' and in particular a sense of loyalty to the nation on some level can be stretched a long way. Going to Oxford or Cambridge will also tend to increase confidence that the humanoid in question will be a safe pair of hands.

On a more general human level, not exclusive to those with some power and influence, knowing a secret or any information which could be of benefit to another can really heat up our brains. Whilst there are all manner of occasions on which people manage to keep their cards close to their chest, sometimes we end up with a burning desire to share information with others, including those affected, even if the consequences carry more personal risk than potential benefit.

Of course none of this in any way rules out other motivations that are specific to the situation & people involved, theres plenty of room for you to decide that he did it to help the Tories or the Lib Dems or whatever. I don't think there is anything wrong with dwelling on this stuff now, but at the same time I can see why people would be keen to focus on one target at a time, not fight on too many fronts at once in case the overall effort is undermined. This can be easier said than done, for some of us may question whether anything will really be solved if we ignore all the double-standards and hypocrisy that shows up along the way. We might be rather interested in the full reality of how things are, even if shining a torch into certain dark corners at the wrong moment causes the struggle to become fragmented.

Things that are fairly well known often mean that they're fairly well known by a select few. Make ot known to all right now. Who will lose? Or is all principle drowned in (inept internet) tactics?

 

[butchersapron]

Yes, it's a simple question and a good one, in case anyone didn't already get that. That's not the same as saying that answers to that questions, answers based on more than "gut feeling"/"I've read 300 years of British history"/"lizards", are forthcoming. Evidence, where the fuck is it?

edit - btw, there's no difference between his employes and the establishment, they are per definition one and the same.

I think offering historically informed answers is fair enough to questions you say are legitimate.

 

[ViolentPanda]

He's a liberal. What more explanation do you need?

It's not enough of an explanation, frankly.

We may customarily cuss liberals on this site, but Rusbridger's undoubted liberalism doesn't explain why he'd engage in an action that didn't serve the interests of his employers.

So, if we ask ourselves whose interests were most likely to have been served by his action, the only tenable conclusion is that it was the interests of the establishment that were served.

 

[laptop]

We may customarily cuss liberals on this site, but Rusbridger's undoubted liberalism doesn't explain why he'd engage in an action that didn't serve the interests of his employers.

Once again: I believe he believed he was serving the interests of the party he'd backed in the election - the Liberals.

But, short of administering a Truth Serum to him, I may never know.

Should newspaper editors back parties?

 

[ymu]

Things that are fairly well known often mean that they're fairly well known by a select few. Make ot known to all right now. Who will lose? Or is all principle drowned in (inept internet) tactics?

I think the Guardian would be a much easier nut to crack once the workings of the media are already laid bare. You disagree. Now, move on because this is fucking ridiculous.

 

[butchersapron]

They should not save parties from shit. But oh no, two posts and murdoch is off the hook. All over

 

[Streathamite]

c'mon. If you got on Question Time, don't you think it'd be worth a one liner, after ripping into the whole of NI, along the lines of 'and wtf was Rusbridger doing giving Cameron that information, anyway?'

I don't think so, because Rusbridger cvan always act whiter than white and say he was acting in the national interest

 

[butchersapron]

I think the Guardian would be a much easier nut to crack once the workings of the media are already laid bare. You disagree. Now, move on because this is fucking ridiculous.

You decide once more

 

[ymu]

It's not enough of an explanation, frankly.

We may customarily cuss liberals on this site, but Rusbridger's undoubted liberalism doesn't explain why he'd engage in an action that didn't serve the interests of his employers.

So, if we ask ourselves whose interests were most likely to have been served by his action, the only tenable conclusion is that it was the interests of the establishment that were served.

Why are you addressing a point I never made?

 

[butchersapron]

I don't think so, because Rusbridger cvan always act whiter than white and say he was acting in the national interest

And that's how we expose what the national interest is.

No sorry, must only talk about murdoch

 

[belboid]

I don't think so, because Rusbridger cvan always act whiter than white and say he was acting in the national interest

getting him to say that would be worthwhile, imo. National fucking Interest? My arse.

 

[Balbi]

B3ta outstrips itself.

 

[butchersapron]

There's something here that covers all sorts of parts of social life - what sort of idiot says no, narrow it down. Investigate less.

 

[Fedayn]

A question if I may, been out of the country, what information did Rusbridger give to Cameron??

 

[weltweit]

Ed Milliband is pressing the accusation that Cameron displayed bad judgement in hiring Andy Coulson.

Say Cameron at tommorrows Question Time says, "yes I am guilty of bad judgement in this case" .. What then?

 

[TruXta]

A question if I may, been out of the country, what information did Rusbridger give to Cameron??

That Coulson was dodgy.

 

[TruXta]

I think offering historically informed answers is fair enough to questions you say are legitimate.

Fair enough, we disagree on the standards of evidence needed to answer that particular question. NEXT!

 

[Balbi]

Ed Milliband is pressing the accusation that Cameron displayed bad judgement in hiring Andy Coulson.

Say Cameron at tommorrows Question Time says, "yes I am guilty of bad judgement in this case" .. What then?

Use it to rip on poor judgement over everything else? The 'schools and hospitals must be allowed to fail' thing that came out last week.

 

[weltweit]

A question if I may, been out of the country, what information did Rusbridger give to Cameron??

Apparently Rusbridger tried to warn Cameron that Coulson was damaged goods.