Murdoch's News of the World hacks dead teenager's phone

[Andaluz]

Just for the sheer craic of it, would anyone from the left care to summarize the facts surrounding News International, the Met, and British Politicians? You need not provide links, just say - in your own words - what is happening, to who, and why.

Anyone game?

This seems a fairly straightforward ask.

The News of the World operated a ruthless editorial strategy of using private investigators (such as Glenn Mulcaire) to hack the phones of celebrities, politicians and people in the news. They did this in order to make such quasi- and occasionally completely illegal activities at one step removed from News Intl. direct employees, so giving them plausible deniablity. When that strategy blew up in their face with the conviction of Mulcaire and his in-house handler, Clive Goodman in 2003, the practice was denied by the upper management and the buck was passed down the line to the people eventually convicted. The systematic and regular use of phone tapping and email hacking was not discontinued however, despite claims by the erstwhile editors, Rebekah Brooks (née Wade) and Andy Coulson that this had happened.

What actually happened was that the tapping and hacking activities were brought back in-house. Through the dogged investigative work of the Guardian to reveal such abuses of press standards it has been revealed that in addition to PR-hungry actors and personalities, and the more newsworthy politicians, the NotW was also hacking and tapping victims and families of newsworthy crimes. With politicians and celebrities the issue could be obfuscated by referring to the publicity-mad culture of modern politics and entertainment. When the victims of crime began to be targeted such semantics could not be employed and the rest of the media began to reflect public outrage, where before there had been something of a consiracy of silence.

Now the Met and the politicians. As long ago as 2003 Rebekah Wade admitted that the NotW had paid serving police officers for information or confirmation of stories. It now appears that such payments ran into hundreds of thousands of pounds. Why it has taken until now for anyone in authority at the Met to view this as corruption is anyone's guess.

The close ties that News Intl. and successive governments have had culminated in Cameron appointing Andy Coulson as his media chief, this despite Coulson's former role as editor if the NotW and his subsequent implication the the hacking and tapping activities of the paper over what must be now more than 20 years. The Met's C-in-C also appointed another News Intl./NotW ex, Neil Wallis as his PR guru. That accounts for Sir Paul Stephenson's resignation.

How's that?

That's a very fair summary. Except I specified 'facts'. When it comes to cold, hard, facts, we really don't have many. Certainly, since Wade has admitted the payments to police officers, that's pretty solid. Certainly, on the face of it, it appears that hacking was a common practice at NotW.

But when it comes to real facts, we don't know as much as we think we know. Therein lies my point. People are accepting media speculation as fact, and it is not.

I have repeatedly said that I am quite happy to see Brook, Murdoch and anyone else who was involved in this answer for their actions - and, if crimes were committed (as certainly appears to be the case), that they face whatever legal consequences for those actions.

So, why is it that - because I don't accept media bullshit without question and some critical thought - I'm apparently 'defending' Murdoch. I have not written one word in defense of him... what I do is question where other people accept whatever the media tell them to accept. Unlike some, I will not allow others to form my opinions for me.

Well here are a few facts:

1. The NotW DID employ private investigators to hack phones and emails. That was proved in the 2003 court case.
2. Reekah Wade was the editor of the paper at the time, hence held ultimate responsibility for the actions of her staff.
3. Wade admitted paying police officers for information.
4. Murdoch has admitted and apologised for the actions of the NotW in relation to the murdered teenager Millie Dowler.
5. News Intl. has admitted that it hackd into the phones and emails of up to 2,000 public figures including the former Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott.
6. A number of News Intl. executives, including Brooks (Wade), Wallis and Coulson have been arrested in relation to hacking and police corruption charges. This is not 'media bullshit'.

 

[California Girl]

This seems a fairly straightforward ask.

The News of the World operated a ruthless editorial strategy of using private investigators (such as Glenn Mulcaire) to hack the phones of celebrities, politicians and people in the news. They did this in order to make such quasi- and occasionally completely illegal activities at one step removed from News Intl. direct employees, so giving them plausible deniablity. When that strategy blew up in their face with the conviction of Mulcaire and his in-house handler, Clive Goodman in 2003, the practice was denied by the upper management and the buck was passed down the line to the people eventually convicted. The systematic and regular use of phone tapping and email hacking was not discontinued however, despite claims by the erstwhile editors, Rebekah Brooks (née Wade) and Andy Coulson that this had happened.

What actually happened was that the tapping and hacking activities were brought back in-house. Through the dogged investigative work of the Guardian to reveal such abuses of press standards it has been revealed that in addition to PR-hungry actors and personalities, and the more newsworthy politicians, the NotW was also hacking and tapping victims and families of newsworthy crimes. With politicians and celebrities the issue could be obfuscated by referring to the publicity-mad culture of modern politics and entertainment. When the victims of crime began to be targeted such semantics could not be employed and the rest of the media began to reflect public outrage, where before there had been something of a consiracy of silence.

Now the Met and the politicians. As long ago as 2003 Rebekah Wade admitted that the NotW had paid serving police officers for information or confirmation of stories. It now appears that such payments ran into hundreds of thousands of pounds. Why it has taken until now for anyone in authority at the Met to view this as corruption is anyone's guess.

The close ties that News Intl. and successive governments have had culminated in Cameron appointing Andy Coulson as his media chief, this despite Coulson's former role as editor if the NotW and his subsequent implication the the hacking and tapping activities of the paper over what must be now more than 20 years. The Met's C-in-C also appointed another News Intl./NotW ex, Neil Wallis as his PR guru. That accounts for Sir Paul Stephenson's resignation.

How's that?

That's a very fair summary. Except I specified 'facts'. When it comes to cold, hard, facts, we really don't have many. Certainly, since Wade has admitted the payments to police officers, that's pretty solid. Certainly, on the face of it, it appears that hacking was a common practice at NotW.

But when it comes to real facts, we don't know as much as we think we know. Therein lies my point. People are accepting media speculation as fact, and it is not.

I have repeatedly said that I am quite happy to see Brook, Murdoch and anyone else who was involved in this answer for their actions - and, if crimes were committed (as certainly appears to be the case), that they face whatever legal consequences for those actions.

So, why is it that - because I don't accept media bullshit without question and some critical thought - I'm apparently 'defending' Murdoch. I have not written one word in defense of him... what I do is question where other people accept whatever the media tell them to accept. Unlike some, I will not allow others to form my opinions for me.

Well here are a few facts:

1. The NotW DID employ private investigators to hack phones and emails. That was proved in the 2003 court case.
2. Reekah Wade was the editor of the paper at the time, hence held ultimate responsibility for the actions of her staff.
3. Wade admitted paying police officers for information.
4. Murdoch has admitted and apologised for the actions of the NotW in relation to the murdered teenager Millie Dowler.
5. News Intl. has admitted that it hackd into the phones and emails of up to 2,000 public figures including the former Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott.
6. A number of News Intl. executives, including Brooks (Wade), Wallis and Coulson have been arrested in relation to hacking and police corruption charges. This is not 'media bullshit'.

Yep. One journalist and one PI have already been charged and convicted. 10 journalists have been arrested in the latest clusterfuck... plus Brooks.
Certainly, Brooks is in the shit for bribing police officers. I suspect Murdoch will face questions on that too. It is illegal under US law to bridge foreign officials and British Police Officers are foreign officials.

I'm not saying that the whole thing is media bullshit. What I am saying, consistently, is that - currently - we have more speculation than facts.... and we have people (on this forum) repeating speculation as fact. It is actually quite important to recognize the difference.

And one more really important fact.... there is absolutely no allegations against Fox News... and yet, time and again, the lefties on this forum have insisted that Fox are involved. That is pathetic partisan hackery.

 

[DavidS]

I don't do spoon feeding.... mainly because when I do provide someone with decent information, they either don't know the source so don't accept it, or justify the coverage as being something that it clearly was not.

I would be more than happy to take any example you provide me with 100% seriousness. Honestly, I hear all of the crap about the media, but I don't see it. If you provide a video clip where ABC, CBS or NBC knowingly skewed a story (i.e. they presented a story in which the facts were altered in order to promote a liberal agenda), then I would be happy to publicize it on my Facebook page (3500 followers). I talk about Fox all the time on there..

 

[Zona]

Damn some people will defend defend defend even though they look like fucking morons doing it.

Newspapers getting shut down. Owners apologizing for those acts. CFO's actually getting arrested, yet they still defend defend defend....NO MATTER WHAT.

You look like a fucking idiot here.

Bitch.

Oh and god bless.

Murdoch's appearance before Parliament on Tuesday should be very interesting.

Can someone ask Caligirl why murdock apologized and what did he aplogize for?

lol

He apologized for 'major wrongdoing' by the News of the World.

I am not privy to his innermost thoughts, but, I would suspect that he apologized because journalists in his employ committed illegal and morally reprehensible acts.

See, no one had to ask me for you.... you are perfectly at liberty to address me yourself.... unless you're scared of me. Which would be understandable.

That's a very fair summary. Except I specified 'facts'. When it comes to cold, hard, facts, we really don't have many. Certainly, since Wade has admitted the payments to police officers, that's pretty solid. Certainly, on the face of it, it appears that hacking was a common practice at NotW.

But when it comes to real facts, we don't know as much as we think we know. Therein lies my point. People are accepting media speculation as fact, and it is not.

I have repeatedly said that I am quite happy to see Brook, Murdoch and anyone else who was involved in this answer for their actions - and, if crimes were committed (as certainly appears to be the case), that they face whatever legal consequences for those actions.

So, why is it that - because I don't accept media bullshit without question and some critical thought - I'm apparently 'defending' Murdoch. I have not written one word in defense of him... what I do is question where other people accept whatever the media tell them to accept. Unlike some, I will not allow others to form my opinions for me.

Well here are a few facts:

1. The NotW DID employ private investigators to hack phones and emails. That was proved in the 2003 court case.
2. Reekah Wade was the editor of the paper at the time, hence held ultimate responsibility for the actions of her staff.
3. Wade admitted paying police officers for information.
4. Murdoch has admitted and apologised for the actions of the NotW in relation to the murdered teenager Millie Dowler.
5. News Intl. has admitted that it hackd into the phones and emails of up to 2,000 public figures including the former Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott.
6. A number of News Intl. executives, including Brooks (Wade), Wallis and Coulson have been arrested in relation to hacking and police corruption charges. This is not 'media bullshit'.

Yep. One journalist and one PI have already been charged and convicted. 10 journalists have been arrested in the latest clusterfuck... plus Brooks.
Certainly, Brooks is in the shit for bribing police officers. I suspect Murdoch will face questions on that too. It is illegal under US law to bridge foreign officials and British Police Officers are foreign officials.

I'm not saying that the whole thing is media bullshit. What I am saying, consistently, is that - currently - we have more speculation than facts.... and we have people (on this forum) repeating speculation as fact. It is actually quite important to recognize the difference.

And one more really important fact.... there is absolutely no allegations against Fox News... and yet, time and again, the lefties on this forum have insisted that Fox are involved. That is pathetic partisan hackery.

Fox is involved because Murdock is involved. Get it hack?

 

[California Girl]

Damn some people will defend defend defend even though they look like fucking morons doing it.

Newspapers getting shut down. Owners apologizing for those acts. CFO's actually getting arrested, yet they still defend defend defend....NO MATTER WHAT.

You look like a fucking idiot here.

Bitch.

Oh and god bless.

He apologized for 'major wrongdoing' by the News of the World.

I am not privy to his innermost thoughts, but, I would suspect that he apologized because journalists in his employ committed illegal and morally reprehensible acts.

See, no one had to ask me for you.... you are perfectly at liberty to address me yourself.... unless you're scared of me. Which would be understandable.

Well here are a few facts:

1. The NotW DID employ private investigators to hack phones and emails. That was proved in the 2003 court case.
2. Reekah Wade was the editor of the paper at the time, hence held ultimate responsibility for the actions of her staff.
3. Wade admitted paying police officers for information.
4. Murdoch has admitted and apologised for the actions of the NotW in relation to the murdered teenager Millie Dowler.
5. News Intl. has admitted that it hackd into the phones and emails of up to 2,000 public figures including the former Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott.
6. A number of News Intl. executives, including Brooks (Wade), Wallis and Coulson have been arrested in relation to hacking and police corruption charges. This is not 'media bullshit'.

Yep. One journalist and one PI have already been charged and convicted. 10 journalists have been arrested in the latest clusterfuck... plus Brooks.
Certainly, Brooks is in the shit for bribing police officers. I suspect Murdoch will face questions on that too. It is illegal under US law to bridge foreign officials and British Police Officers are foreign officials.

I'm not saying that the whole thing is media bullshit. What I am saying, consistently, is that - currently - we have more speculation than facts.... and we have people (on this forum) repeating speculation as fact. It is actually quite important to recognize the difference.

And one more really important fact.... there is absolutely no allegations against Fox News... and yet, time and again, the lefties on this forum have insisted that Fox are involved. That is pathetic partisan hackery.

Fox is involved because Murdock is involved. Get it hack?

No, actually, I don't. I don't see that Fox are guilty of anything. I do get that idiots on the left want Fox to be guilty but, so far, there has not even been an allegation of any wrong doing by anyone at Fox. I do get that the left see some opportunity to destroy a media outlet that they feel threatened by.... and I find that funny.

 

[Zona]

Damn some people will defend defend defend even though they look like fucking morons doing it.

Newspapers getting shut down. Owners apologizing for those acts. CFO's actually getting arrested, yet they still defend defend defend....NO MATTER WHAT.

You look like a fucking idiot here.

Bitch.

Oh and god bless.

Yep. One journalist and one PI have already been charged and convicted. 10 journalists have been arrested in the latest clusterfuck... plus Brooks.
Certainly, Brooks is in the shit for bribing police officers. I suspect Murdoch will face questions on that too. It is illegal under US law to bridge foreign officials and British Police Officers are foreign officials.

I'm not saying that the whole thing is media bullshit. What I am saying, consistently, is that - currently - we have more speculation than facts.... and we have people (on this forum) repeating speculation as fact. It is actually quite important to recognize the difference.

And one more really important fact.... there is absolutely no allegations against Fox News... and yet, time and again, the lefties on this forum have insisted that Fox are involved. That is pathetic partisan hackery.

Fox is involved because Murdock is involved. Get it hack?

No, actually, I don't. I don't see that Fox are guilty of anything. I do get that idiots on the left want Fox to be guilty but, so far, there has not even been an allegation of any wrong doing by anyone at Fox. I do get that the left see some opportunity to destroy a media outlet that they feel threatened by.... and I find that funny.

Well, lets see who gets arrested becuase of this Fox owning ass. His ideology and practices oozes Fox.

 

[California Girl]

Fox is involved because Murdock is involved. Get it hack?

No, actually, I don't. I don't see that Fox are guilty of anything. I do get that idiots on the left want Fox to be guilty but, so far, there has not even been an allegation of any wrong doing by anyone at Fox. I do get that the left see some opportunity to destroy a media outlet that they feel threatened by.... and I find that funny.

Well, lets see who gets arrested becuase of this Fox owning ass. His ideology and practices oozes Fox.

No one from Fox has been implicated, named, or even a vague suggestion (except from idiots on message boards getting all hyper while totally ignoring the facts) So,Yea, do let me know when someone who works for Fox News is CHARGED. Cuz, in this country, being arrested is not a guilty verdict.... well, not to anyone except the very stupid.

 

[Andaluz]

Yep. One journalist and one PI have already been charged and convicted. 10 journalists have been arrested in the latest clusterfuck... plus Brooks.
Certainly, Brooks is in the shit for bribing police officers. I suspect Murdoch will face questions on that too. It is illegal under US law to bridge foreign officials and British Police Officers are foreign officials.

I'm not saying that the whole thing is media bullshit. What I am saying, consistently, is that - currently - we have more speculation than facts.... and we have people (on this forum) repeating speculation as fact. It is actually quite important to recognize the difference.

And one more really important fact.... there is absolutely no allegations against Fox News... and yet, time and again, the lefties on this forum have insisted that Fox are involved. That is pathetic partisan hackery.

It is indeed very premature to bring Fox News specifically into this story. I haven't read anything conclusive linking FNC to the NotW scandal. I have read speculation about the hacking of 9/11 victims phones, but so far it's just that, speculation. As a committed 'leftie', and a former Murdoch employee, I'm delighted to see that the gutter journalistic activities of New Intl. are finally being exposed, but to extrapolate the activities of one arm of the organisation to the rest seems premature at best.

Sky News, the UK Murdoch news channel has not been implicated at all and, as far as I am aware, operates to much, much higher standards of journalistic ethics than their colleagure on the other side of London do. Why? Because they have to. UK broadcasting media is held to far, far higher regulatory requirements than the self-policing print media. A proper code of ethical standards, properly and independently enforced is, far from being any kind of censorship, the best way to guarantee that the excesses of tabloid journalism are maintained.

 

[California Girl]

Yep. One journalist and one PI have already been charged and convicted. 10 journalists have been arrested in the latest clusterfuck... plus Brooks.
Certainly, Brooks is in the shit for bribing police officers. I suspect Murdoch will face questions on that too. It is illegal under US law to bridge foreign officials and British Police Officers are foreign officials.

I'm not saying that the whole thing is media bullshit. What I am saying, consistently, is that - currently - we have more speculation than facts.... and we have people (on this forum) repeating speculation as fact. It is actually quite important to recognize the difference.

And one more really important fact.... there is absolutely no allegations against Fox News... and yet, time and again, the lefties on this forum have insisted that Fox are involved. That is pathetic partisan hackery.

It is indeed very premature to bring Fox News specifically into this story. I haven't read anything conclusive linking FNC to the NotW scandal. I have read speculation about the hacking of 9/11 victims phones, but so far it's just that, speculation. As a committed 'leftie', and a former Murdoch employee, I'm delighted to see that the gutter journalistic activities of New Intl. are finally being exposed, but to extrapolate the activities of one arm of the organisation to the rest seems premature at best.

Sky News, the UK Murdoch news channel has not been implicated at all and, as far as I am aware, operates to much, much higher standards of journalistic ethics than their colleagure on the other side of London do. Why? Because they have to. UK broadcasting media is held to far, far higher regulatory requirements than the self-policing print media. A proper code of ethical standards, properly and independently enforced is, far from being any kind of censorship, the best way to guarantee that the excesses of tabloid journalism are maintained.

I certainly didn't shed any tears for the NotW. Gawd awful rag.

The only people linking Fox News to this scandal are left wing idiots. Even the supposed claim from the anonymous ex-cop did not mention Fox News. 'He', assuming 'he' exists, said it was NotW journalists. But he also claims he was 'besieged' by journalists. I would want to see something far more substantial than an untraceable quote from an anonymous source before I took that as anything significant.

Bear in mind, that 'gutter journalistic activities of News Int' includes the Sunday Times, one of Britain's most respected newspapers... for good reason. They are an excellent paper. And very balanced.

I think that some people on the left are just a tad overly excited about the thought of 'destroying Murdoch, and Fox News'. Facts seem to be becoming irrelevant in their haste to hang people.

Sky News is actually a well respected outlet... Frankly, I find them more balanced than the BBC - but even the BBC recognizes that it 'leans left'.

Brooks has now been released from police custody. No charges as yet.

The other really interesting part of this case is that it will, probably, reach much further than News Int. Other tabloids, not owned by Murdoch, are also in the firing line. The only reason they have gotten away with it so far is the hysteria surrounding Murdoch and Brooks.

FYI: speculation in the UK is that James Murdoch will be next in line to be hauled in for questioning by the police. That should be a fun one. The left will love that! They'll have him charged, tried and convicted before the ink is dry on his statement.

 

[Andaluz]

I certainly didn't shed any tears for the NotW. Gawd awful rag.

The only people linking Fox News to this scandal are left wing idiots. Even the supposed claim from the anonymous ex-cop did not mention Fox News. 'He', assuming 'he' exists, said it was NotW journalists. But he also claims he was 'besieged' by journalists. I would want to see something far more substantial than an untraceable quote from an anonymous source before I took that as anything significant.

Bear in mind, that 'gutter journalistic activities of News Int' includes the Sunday Times, one of Britain's most respected newspapers... for good reason. They are an excellent paper. And very balanced.

I think that some people on the left are just a tad overly excited about the thought of 'destroying Murdoch, and Fox News'. Facts seem to be becoming irrelevant in their haste to hang people.

Sky News is actually a well respected outlet... Frankly, I find them more balanced than the BBC - but even the BBC recognizes that it 'leans left'.

Brooks has now been released from police custody. No charges as yet.

The other really interesting part of this case is that it will, probably, reach much further than News Int. Other tabloids, not owned by Murdoch, are also in the firing line. The only reason they have gotten away with it so far is the hysteria surrounding Murdoch and Brooks.

FYI: speculation in the UK is that James Murdoch will be next in line to be hauled in for questioning by the police. That should be a fun one. The left will love that! They'll have him charged, tried and convicted before the ink is dry on his statement.

The Sunday Times is implicated in this scandal, from no less a source than former PM, Gordon Brown.

BBC News - Brown in ferocious Commons attack on News International

 

[California Girl]

I'm just glad Fox was able to get the real truth out there, fair and balanced you know, that the News of the World is the victim in this story.

I've just read the comments on some of the related stories on Fox News website. Interesting how some people can be so totally and completely wrong about what is actually happening.

For example:

nonhater2010 6 minutes ago in reply to urdisturbed
Eww. What kind of a person would do that kind of thing? And then they put in different messages and deleted others so the parents would think the poor girl was still alive.

Where the hell did this 'nonhater' get that idea from? Cuz it hasn't been reported in the UK media. See, that's the problem with this kind of thing.... people make shit up. Like the Guardian making shit up about The Sun hacking former PM Brown's phone. And people still believe that, even though the Guardian withdrew the accusation and apologized for it.

That person was somewhat misinformed, but the general idea is true. NotW did delete messages, which resulted in the voicemail not being full, which causes the parents and police to think the girl may still be alive.

He claimed....

(Snipped)... they put in different messages and deleted others so the parents would think the poor girl was still alive.

Firstly, they did not 'put in different messages'. They deleted messages left by her family and friends. But they did that to make room for more messages for them to hack and listen to.

He then claims they did this 'so that the parents would think the poor girl was still alive'. There is absolutely no claim - or even speculation that anyone deliberately tried to make the parents think she was alive.

It is, in short, bullshit. The basic facts are there - but he has twisted those facts beyond truth and into bullshit.

 

[California Girl]

I certainly didn't shed any tears for the NotW. Gawd awful rag.

The only people linking Fox News to this scandal are left wing idiots. Even the supposed claim from the anonymous ex-cop did not mention Fox News. 'He', assuming 'he' exists, said it was NotW journalists. But he also claims he was 'besieged' by journalists. I would want to see something far more substantial than an untraceable quote from an anonymous source before I took that as anything significant.

Bear in mind, that 'gutter journalistic activities of News Int' includes the Sunday Times, one of Britain's most respected newspapers... for good reason. They are an excellent paper. And very balanced.

I think that some people on the left are just a tad overly excited about the thought of 'destroying Murdoch, and Fox News'. Facts seem to be becoming irrelevant in their haste to hang people.

Sky News is actually a well respected outlet... Frankly, I find them more balanced than the BBC - but even the BBC recognizes that it 'leans left'.

Brooks has now been released from police custody. No charges as yet.

The other really interesting part of this case is that it will, probably, reach much further than News Int. Other tabloids, not owned by Murdoch, are also in the firing line. The only reason they have gotten away with it so far is the hysteria surrounding Murdoch and Brooks.

FYI: speculation in the UK is that James Murdoch will be next in line to be hauled in for questioning by the police. That should be a fun one. The left will love that! They'll have him charged, tried and convicted before the ink is dry on his statement.

The Sunday Times is implicated in this scandal, from no less a source than former PM, Gordon Brown.

BBC News - Brown in ferocious Commons attack on News International

Yea, and Gordon also claimed the Sun hacked his phone and published information about his kid's illness. Did not happen. Brown is on a crusade. No less a source....

 

[Andaluz]

I certainly didn't shed any tears for the NotW. Gawd awful rag.

The only people linking Fox News to this scandal are left wing idiots. Even the supposed claim from the anonymous ex-cop did not mention Fox News. 'He', assuming 'he' exists, said it was NotW journalists. But he also claims he was 'besieged' by journalists. I would want to see something far more substantial than an untraceable quote from an anonymous source before I took that as anything significant.

Bear in mind, that 'gutter journalistic activities of News Int' includes the Sunday Times, one of Britain's most respected newspapers... for good reason. They are an excellent paper. And very balanced.

I think that some people on the left are just a tad overly excited about the thought of 'destroying Murdoch, and Fox News'. Facts seem to be becoming irrelevant in their haste to hang people.

Sky News is actually a well respected outlet... Frankly, I find them more balanced than the BBC - but even the BBC recognizes that it 'leans left'.

Brooks has now been released from police custody. No charges as yet.

The other really interesting part of this case is that it will, probably, reach much further than News Int. Other tabloids, not owned by Murdoch, are also in the firing line. The only reason they have gotten away with it so far is the hysteria surrounding Murdoch and Brooks.

FYI: speculation in the UK is that James Murdoch will be next in line to be hauled in for questioning by the police. That should be a fun one. The left will love that! They'll have him charged, tried and convicted before the ink is dry on his statement.

The Sunday Times is implicated in this scandal, from no less a source than former PM, Gordon Brown.

BBC News - Brown in ferocious Commons attack on News International

Yea, and Gordon also claimed the Sun hacked his phone and published information about his kid's illness. Did not happen. Brown is on a crusade. No less a source....

Gordon Brown may be many things, several of them negative, but a 'crusader' he is not, and has never been. He was not a popular PM but has never been accused of unethical behaviour. FWIW it was not Brown who claimed The Sun hacked his son's medical records, it was The Guardian, who retracted the claim and apologised less than 24 hours after it made it. It has taken News Intl. 8 years to admit to the extent of their poor journalism.

 

[California Girl]

The Sunday Times is implicated in this scandal, from no less a source than former PM, Gordon Brown.

BBC News - Brown in ferocious Commons attack on News International

Yea, and Gordon also claimed the Sun hacked his phone and published information about his kid's illness. Did not happen. Brown is on a crusade. No less a source....

Gordon Brown may be many things, several of them negative, but a 'crusader' he is not, and has never been. He was not a popular PM but has never been accused of unethical behaviour. FWIW it was not Brown who claimed The Sun hacked his son's medical records, it was The Guardian, who retracted the claim and apologised less than 24 hours after it made it. It has taken News Intl. 8 years to admit to the extent of their poor journalism.

My point.... we just don't know enough to make many informed judgements. Idiot hacks on the left think I'm 'defending' Mudoch. I have never defended him.... or anyone else involved.... what I have done is challenged people who repeat speculation as fact.

 

[Andaluz]

Yea, and Gordon also claimed the Sun hacked his phone and published information about his kid's illness. Did not happen. Brown is on a crusade. No less a source....

Gordon Brown may be many things, several of them negative, but a 'crusader' he is not, and has never been. He was not a popular PM but has never been accused of unethical behaviour. FWIW it was not Brown who claimed The Sun hacked his son's medical records, it was The Guardian, who retracted the claim and apologised less than 24 hours after it made it. It has taken News Intl. 8 years to admit to the extent of their poor journalism.

My point.... we just don't know enough to make many informed judgements. Idiot hacks on the left think I'm 'defending' Mudoch. I have never defended him.... or anyone else involved.... what I have done is challenged people who repeat speculation as fact.

I understand that, but such hackery is hardly the preserve of the Left. Look at the reaction from the Right to the Dominique Strauss-Kahn issue. They had him tried, convicted and sentenced before he'd even appeared in court. And we know how that has worked out. Everyone who jumps to conclusions is going to be proved wrong as often as they are proved right.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I think FoxNews found a way to silence themselves!

Really?

How is that?

Who's going to respect a "news" organization the hires Glenn Beck and hacks the phones of 13 year old kidnap victims and dead soldiers.

Fox news hacked the phone of a 13 year old?

Oh, I get it - you're just lying to smear the hated opposition.

Like most of what you post, there is no truth at all to your claim.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[q
Yet.

So you admit that you're lying through your fucking teeth, then.

Such is the way of fascist democrats.

 

[California Girl]

I think FoxNews found a way to silence themselves!

Really?

How is that?

Who's going to respect a "news" organization the hires Glenn Beck and hacks the phones of 13 year old kidnap victims and dead soldiers.

Fox news hacked the phone of a 13 year old?

Oh, I get it - you're just lying to smear the hated opposition.

Like most of what you post, there is no truth at all to your claim.

That's the morality of the left. They will lie about dead kids and dead soldiers.... just to score partisan points.

Disgusting, don't you think?

 

[Uncensored2008]

I suggest we bookmark Chrissie's prediction about Fox News being 'finished' and see whether, this time next year, it has come true. I'll bet not.

The only way Fox would be "finished" is if Dear Leader sends troops in to shut them down.

Even if Murdoch is destroyed financially, Fox will simply be sold. It is the most profitable news service in the nation. It would take about 5 minutes for the sale to go through.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I dunno. If you had a family member that was killed on 9/11 and if someone hacked into your dead family member's cell phone and listened to messages between you and your family member, wouldn't you want them investigated? It's a violation of our constitutional rights - whether alive or dead.

What if they dug up the body and did experiments on them?

Because there is precisely the same amount of evidence supporting both claims - which is zero.

You shameless demagogues have not restraint, no ethics and no dignity.