Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact
  • Hi Guest,
    We have now moved the boards to the new server hardware.
    Search will be impaired while it re-indexes the posts.
    See the thread in the Feedback forum for updates and feedback.
    Lazy Llama

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

gif of the day, ladies & gents:

20185234094e1de52f48469.gif

I don't get BBC where I am, so what's the full story with regard to this one? Why is wee Ed making like a stunned goldfish there?
 
I don't get BBC where I am, so what's the full story with regard to this one? Why is wee Ed making like a stunned goldfish there?
When Cameron was lying through his teeth about who told him what and when. He lied to Parliament. Miliband looked astonished, Clegg closed his eyes in quiet horror at the realisation that Cameron just brought his own government down so it's all been for nothing, and Osborne's already terrified visage took on an aura of total and uttter defeat.

It's beautiful. You have to watch it. Miliband was doing the horrified goldfish impression for a looooong time whilst Cameron lied and lied and lied. :D :cool:
 
wouldn't that be great if they had to fly out of the country just to avoid appearing in front of the select committee :)

would they do that? i'm fairly sure that, if the 'fit and proper' test were ever applied (say in a future bid for sky), that 'fleeing the country to avoid giving evidence to a commons select committee' may blot their copybook. i think they're likely to have an eye to this in any moves they make in the near future.
 
would they do that? i'm fairly sure that, if the 'fit and proper' test were ever applied (say in a future bid for sky), that 'fleeing the country to avoid giving evidence to a commons select committee' may blot their copybook. i think they're likely to have an eye to this in any moves they make in the near future.

Dunno, they've not exactly made the wisest decisions so far. Fleeing the country would be humiliating, but are they prepared to lie to parliament instead? Or just remain silent?

They don't have many options, and they still have the arrogance of power without any actual power left, so more headless chicken act is not at all unlikely.

It's all good. :)

Even better if they tried that and got publicly arrested at the airport, by beefeaters, just for the general lolz.
:D :cool:
 
When Cameron was lying through his teeth about who told him what and when. He lied to Parliament. Miliband looked astonished, Clegg closed his eyes in quiet horror at the realisation that Cameron just brought his own government down so it's all been for nothing, and Osborne's already terrified visage took on an aura of total and uttter defeat.

It's beautiful. You have to watch it. Miliband was doing the horrified goldfish impression for a looooong time whilst Cameron lied and lied and lied. :D :cool:

That is interesting, what specific lies do you think Cameron made?
 
That is interesting, what specific lies do you think Cameron made?
I think Rusbridger has done a full run down. The easiest way to get a clue is to watch the video and watch for horrified goldfish impressions and sadly resigned expressions setting in ... but from my failing memory...

- that the information given to him by Rusbridger was no different to what was in the Guardian in Feb 2010 (what he was told was legally unpublishable at that time)

- that no one else saw fit to tell him about it (several other editors warned him too, or so Rusbridger claims)

- that no one ever asked a question about it in the house or a press conference so it couldn't have been that important (this was a bizarrely confused and apparently irrelevant point, but it is a lie - he was asked about it in at least one press conference)
 
Does this committee appearance next week matter in any material way now, given the scope of the public inquiry and the withdrawn bid - it's surely reduced to grandstanding and venting?
 
Does this committee appearance next week matter in any material way now, given the scope of the public inquiry and the withdrawn bid - it's surely reduced to grandstanding and venting?

Having listened to Radio 4 this morn, it turns out that as well as not being able to compel the Murdochs to attend (due to US citizenship), they can't force Brooks to turn up (i.e. they don't have the power to get Plod to arrest her and drag her to the committee). If so, I fear you may well be right - a committee where none of the protagonists are present. :hmm:
 
Yep, but even if they were to turn up, so what. It'd be a just a show trial, without the trial.

It's all about the judge-led, under oath, Public Inquiry now. This committee is yesterdays chip wrapper.
 
Yep, but even if they were to turn up, so what. It'd be a just a show trial, without the trial.

It'd be worth it for the squirm factor, I s'pose, but even if Brooks did turn up, she'd be legally entitled to say "no comment" to every question thrown at her. Something the meedja would cover with gusto, but as you say, would it actually achieve anything? Would questions be answered, and would at least some of the truth finally be revealed?
 
Thery don't have to lie, they just stonewall: 'it's subject to a police investigation, we can't say anything at this point'.

Of course, that's not going to stop some more Parliamentarians trying to get in on the televised ceremonial slaughter for their own self-promotional ends.
 
Thery don't have to lie, they just stonewall: 'it's subject to a police investigation, we can't say anything at this point'.

Of course, that's not going to stop some more Parliamentarians trying to get in on the televised ceremonial slaughter for their own self-promotional ends.

Good point on the MPs - wonder how many of these now "champions of the people" would have happily suckled on the Murdoch teat a few weeks ago?
 
Miliband looked astonished, Clegg closed his eyes in quiet horror at the realisation that Cameron just brought his own government down so it's all been for nothing, and Osborne's already terrified visage took on an aura of total and uttter defeat.
Jesus, Jeffery Archer is among us.
 
Having listened to Radio 4 this morn, it turns out that as well as not being able to compel the Murdochs to attend (due to US citizenship), they can't force Brooks to turn up (i.e. they don't have the power to get Plod to arrest her and drag her to the committee). If so, I fear you may well be right - a committee where none of the protagonists are present. :hmm:
It's the same as why Cameron ducked the Common's debate yesterday and the same as why a defence counsel never makes their client take the stand when they know that they're guilty - their absence implicates them as much as anything that they could say.
 
ymu - you've predicted the fall of the government roughly once a week for a year now.

i'd be delighted to see you proved right, but i'll believe it when the taxi pulls away from number 10, and not before...
 
It's the same as why Cameron ducked the Common's debate yesterday and the same as why a defence counsel never makes their client take the stand when they know that they're guilty - their absence implicates them as much as anything that they could say.

I can certainly see what you mean there, but I'm also bearing in mind what London_Calling says about the "it's police investigation matter" line that the Murdochs and Brooks could spin whether or not they turn up. Again, I think the media etc will make a lot out of it come the day, whatever happens, but in the longer term, would a non-appearance/stonewall appearance prove to be a deeply wounding blow to the parties involved? I guess we shall see come the day itself.
 
I also think the media haven't quite 'got' the change of mood from yesterday; the public have their scalps for now - NotW has gone, the BSkyB bid has gone, the Public Inquiry is of the right terms and scope.

Of course the media wants to maintain the incredibly intense narrative, but the mood has changed..... it's all about the long game now.
 
Good point on the MPs - wonder how many of these now "champions of the people" would have happily suckled on the Murdoch teat a few weeks ago?

Quite a few of them I reckon. Even so it was nice to receive through the post yesterday a reply from my M.P. assuring me he's been asking questions concerning the BSkyB case as far back as 13th January this year. Three pages no less! The most humorous (imo):

Kevin Brennan (Cardiff West) Lab said:
Is the real reason the Secretary of State is not delivering the the statement on BSkyB until the unusually late hour of 3 o'clock that Rupert murdoch has not written it yet?
 
You do realise the media, in their baying for blood, are really just looking for the altar on which to sacrifice their goats?
 
Brooks absolutely can be made to appear before either of the select committees after them. Atm it's a process of invitation. If they decline the committees can takes steps to bring them in - ii think the final act is a vote in the house. Good time for some MPs to make a name for themselves.
 
There is no 'the media' on this - there's different people and bodies pursuing different agendas with different motivations - back covering, journalistic integrity, personal vendettas and so on.
 
There is no 'the media' on this - there's different people and bodies pursuing different agendas with different motivations - back covering, journalistic integrity, personal vendettas and so on.

Most of them looking for the highest profile scapegoat they can get.
 
Back
Top Bottom