Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

butchersapron said:
That's why he tried so hard and so repeatedly to cover it up. His knowledge of dodginess is precisely what he's trying to hide.
Click to expand...

The irony is that it appears everyone knew of his (and NI's) dodginess, and yet noone gave a shit apart from Nick Davies.
 
Labour probly thought it was a gift waiting to happen.

Well, that and the fact that after appointing Campbell they didn't have that strong a leg to stand on
 
Nick Davies was employed, he didn't do it freelance. Tom Watson also worked hard on it - presumably everyone else either had a skeleton (as most of us do) they didn't want exposed, or just didn't want the inevitable and on going smearing of them and/or their families.

This was intimidation of the political class and the Met on a mental scale.
 
pk said:
Has this been mentioned yet?

http://m.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/...police-mobile-tracking?cat=media&type=article

Arguably worse than hacking - phone tracking...
Click to expand...

It's why anyone engaging in criminal stuff even 10 years ago would constantly change their phone .. and always pay as you go. Yer average celebrity and member of the public would have no reason to even think about such a thing. So whatever records there are about this has to land at crooked coppers with far less (I imagine) links to wrongun journalists.
The fuckin cunts !!
 
Seems to be a rumour circulating that the Mirror's 2003 story re. Rio Ferdinand missing his drug test was based on illegally blagged phone records.

If true, I can't wait to see Morgan try to squirm out of this one.
 
London_Calling said:
How can you read and watch as much politics as you do and fail to understand it is not about (as Tom Watson did, for example) asking a list of questions?

With or without help from 'the silks' in 'the Commons', a fucking 8-year old could have done that.

Is it any wonder both Murdoch's became more and more confident the longer it went on.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but the idea that experienced MPs (i.e. experience of a lifetime's politicaql involvement), with all the forensic talent they can call on, and with all the briefs and - excuse me! - hacks who get elected, do not know how to ask the right sort of questions or follow the trail, is ridiculous.
 
belboid said:
Labour probly thought it was a gift waiting to happen.

Well, that and the fact that after appointing Campbell they didn't have that strong a leg to stand on
Click to expand...

This is where Cameron got sucked into making the mistake of employing a journalist as advisor. He was emulating Tony Blair who employed both Cambell and Mandelson from journalistic backgrounds. Both of these characters took over control of their party at different times and got results for Blair - albeit at the expense of the ordinary party members and opponents of Blair. Cameron was so impressed by their performance that he thought a similar man would make him stronger in relation to the media and also within his own party perhaps. What a pity he fell for a bad-un in Coulson. Cameron was already aligned with News International so he would have been unsuspecting of the dodgy side of that organisation, imagining that he was among friends.
 
London_Calling said:
Nick Davies was employed, he didn't do it freelance. Tom Watson also worked hard on it - presumably everyone else either had a skeleton (as most of us do) they didn't want exposed, or just didn't want the inevitable and on going smearing of them and/or their families.

This was intimidation of the political class and the Met on a mental scale.
Click to expand...

Nick Davies has been banging on about this - and the rest of the dark arts - for ages, you cant just suggest he was doing it because he was employed to do so (and IIRC he was threatened to try to get him to drop this). As for Tom Watson (and Bryant), yes they are prominent in this but given whose creatures they were (Watson especially) perhaps some caution should be used when crediting them with noble motives in this case.

And as for "intimidation of the political class" - do me a favour. They sucked up to Murdoch because he could do something for them, far more than sucking up because they were scared of him. In that respect their corrupt involvement with Murdoch (and the rest) is not that dissimilar to their corrupt involvement with the banks, with the Big Four accountancy firms, or any one of a number of other business concerns... who they usually jump to when their time as MPs (or ministers) is done.
 
ViolentPanda said:
FFS.
Positive vetting for "mid-level clearance" used to mean them doing a thorough job on you, up to and including such delights as trawling your political history, your bank account(s), your criminal record, and even contacting your school and college peers and your teachers and tutors.

Not some penny-ante credit and google check.
Click to expand...
No, the Control Risks cheapo job was done before he was cleared to work for the Tories' HQ, i.e. when they were still in opposition. Later, he got the mid-level vetting, when the Coalition Of The Wallies was formed, and he was about to be given a job at No 10
 
butchersapron said:
That's why he tried so hard and so repeatedly to cover it up. His knowledge of dodginess is precisely what he's trying to hide.
Click to expand...



Yep, it's plane isn't it. He thought he could use a rogue's talent and it's blown up in his face.

It's OK though, he's gonna issue a full frank opology, when he has to.
:rolleyes:
 
Streathamite said:
I'm sorry, but the idea that experienced MPs (i.e. experience of a lifetime's politicaql involvement), with all the forensic talent they can call on, and with all the briefs and - excuse me! - hacks who get elected, do not know how to ask the right sort of questions or follow the trail, is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
It really isn't. You must have seen the questioning on the day. Every single question was written in advance.

That is not examination, and it could be done by an 8-year old.


You must also have seen how a line of questioning works in a court room, the traps, faints, emotional manipulation, rhythms, tonal variation, etc, etc, etc of a line of questioning that starts innocuously and is entirely dependent on the answer just given.

An example is what should have happened after they admitted still paying Mulcaire's fees. A golden opportunity totally missed. The Murdoch's should have beem hung on that alone, and James was ready - but the line never came.
 
London_Calling said:
It really isn't. You must have seen the questioning on the day. Every single question was written in advance.
Click to expand...
ALL of those questions would have been drawn up on the basis of extensive consultation with Parliamentary counsel, the HoC in-house legal team who are there specifically for that, and for drafting legislation
 
London_Calling said:
It really isn't. You must have seen the questioning on the day. Every single question was written in advance.

That is not examination, and it could be done by an 8-year old.


You must also have seen how a line of questioning works in a court room, the traps, faints, emotional manipulation, rhythms, tonal variation, etc, etc, etc of a line of questioning that starts innocuously and is entirely dependent on the answer just given.

An example is what should have happened after they admitted still paying Mulcaire's fees. A golden opportunity totally missed. The Murdoch's should have beem hung on that alone, and James was ready - but the line never came.
Click to expand...

So, once again, your argument why only silks are capable of such behaviour is..... because only silks are capable of such behaviour. Jolly well done!
 
belboid said:
So, once again, your argument why only silks are capable of such behaviour is..... because only silks are capable of such behaviour. Jolly well done!
Click to expand...

It may already have been said, but half the forensic skills of silks (and detectives fwiw) are developed because they have restrictions on what they can and cant ask. An MP on a Select Committee has far fewer restrictions.
 
London_Calling said:
You must also have seen how a line of questioning works in a court room, the traps, faints, emotional manipulation, rhythms, tonal variation, etc, etc, etc of a line of questioning that starts innocuously and is entirely dependent on the answer just given.
Click to expand...
This is NOT a court of law, and the rules of questioning, and therefore the techniques and methods that are both allowed and advisable, are totally different. A select committee has NO judicial status; in fact, a local authority planning committee has far more judicial status
 
Mitre10 said:
Seems to be a rumour circulating that the Mirror's 2003 story re. Rio Ferdinand missing his drug test was based on illegally blagged phone records.

If true, I can't wait to see Morgan try to squirm out of this one.
Click to expand...

This report - and others (including an allegation that the Mirror were in possession of a transcript of Angus Deyton's phonecalls from when he left HIGNFY in 2003) are gleefully described in the latest issue of Private Eye*

* or Private Eye (incorporating the News of the World) to give it its new full title.

:D
 
agricola said:
Nick Davies has been banging on about this - and the rest of the dark arts - for ages, you cant just suggest he was doing it because he was employed to do so (and IIRC he was threatened to try to get him to drop this). As for Tom Watson (and Bryant), yes they are prominent in this but given whose creatures they were (Watson especially) perhaps some caution should be used when crediting them with noble motives in this case.

And as for "intimidation of the political class" - do me a favour. They sucked up to Murdoch because he could do something for them, far more than sucking up because they were scared of him. In that respect their corrupt involvement with Murdoch (and the rest) is not that dissimilar to their corrupt involvement with the banks, with the Big Four accountancy firms, or any one of a number of other business concerns... who they usually jump to when their time as MPs (or ministers) is done.
Click to expand...

While I largely agree with what you say, I think the intimidation potential of the possibility of being smeared in the NoTW shouldn't be underestimated.

I think Seumas Milne puts it quite nicely ...

Murdoch's overweening political influence has long been recognised, from well before Tony Blair flew to Australia in 1995 to pay public homage at his corporate court. What has been less well understood is how close-up and personal the pressure exerted by his organisation has been throughout public life. The fear that those who crossed him would be given the full tabloid treatment over their personal misdemeanours, real or imagined, has proved to be a powerful Mafia-like racket.

It was the warning that News International would target their personal lives that cowed members of the Commons culture and media committee over pressing their investigation into phone hacking too vigorously before the last election. Barely a fortnight ago, Ed Miliband was warned that Murdoch's papers would "make it personal" after he broke with the political-class omerta towards the company. The same vow of silence meant that when Rebekah Brooks told MPs in 2003 her organisation had "paid the police for information", the bribery admission sank like a stone.

The Sopranos style is deeply embedded in the Murdoch dynasty. When the New Labour culture secretary Tessa Jowell broke up with her husband in 2006 as he faced Berlusconi-linked corruption charges (he was later cleared), Brooks took her out, letting her cry on her shoulder – just as News International was hacking into the couple's phone. Jowell has now called in her lawyers, but that didn't stop her attending Elisabeth Murdoch's lavish Chipping Norton party earlier this month, along with David Miliband and other Blairite luminaries. The family demands respect – even from those it has punished.
Click to expand...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/20/scandal-exposed-scale-elite-corruption
 
The power goes hand in hand with the potential for intimidation. They feed each other.

Development, potentially very important: Former NoW men Colin Myler & Tom Crone issue sensational statement saying James Murdoch was 'mistaken' in evidence to CMS

Peston says their statement,(can't find yet) implies JM knew hacking went beyond CG. Big trouble
 
Just by way of clarification relating to Tuesday's CMS Select Committee hearing, we would like to point out that James Murdoch's recollection of what he was told when agreeing to settle the Gordon Taylor litigation was mistaken.

In fact, we did inform him of the "for Neville" email which had been produced to us by Gordon Taylor's lawyers
Click to expand...

Just when you think it's quietened down
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Humberto
Missing persons. How many families does it happen to?
Replies
12
Views
862
cupid_stunt
cupid_stunt
steveseagull
Fylde By-election 2024
Replies
10
Views
716
PR1Berske
PR1Berske
cupid_stunt
Security staff contracted by McDonalds soak the sleeping bag of a homeless guy.
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
planetgeli
P
danny la rouge
5:2 Diet book author and TV presenter, Michael Mosley, missing
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
178
Views
8K
Maggot
Maggot
PR1Berske
Rochdale by-election
24 25 26 27 28
Replies
819
Views
37K
TopCat
TopCat
Back
Top Bottom