rupert murdoch scandal

SmarterThanYou said:
operation fast and furious, started during the bush years, was started to shut down the alleged iron pipeline of guns to mexican cartels. sometime in the last 2 years, that operation became operation gunrunner, where ATF offices encouraged gun dealers to conclude suspicious sales in the hopes of 'tracking them to major cartels', all in the official pretense of bringing down drug cartels. border patrol agent brian terry became a victim of this operation by being killed in a skirmish where some of these illicitly sold guns turned up.

Now, it turns out that not only did gunrunner appear to violate numerous laws, but an operation out of florida called 'castaway' also seems to have indications that ATF offices cleared weapons sales to known straw purchasers for export to central america.

Theres more detailed info here, http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?31049-the-ATF-has-some-splaining-to-do
Click to expand...

Good condensed version.
 
Ice Dancer said:
Oh what BS! The guy bought up rag sheets and let them be rag sheets- He has his fingers in conservative and liberal news orgs. alike. Going back to the "early 2000's"? LOL you mean like 4 years ago Tom? GAWD you are hysterical over this!

Like I said earlier in the Thread: "The facts are that a few scurrilous people acted in a deplorable way. There are NO facts that Murdoch was either knowledgeable or complicit-. The idea that a rag sheet would stoop to this level of behavior is neither shocking nor surprising. These kinds of publications are riff with below the belt journalism. Go after the actual perpetrators- if at the end of the day FACTS can be shown to tie Murdoch to knowledge and therefore complicity, then you can bring your pitchfork to the bonfire with at least a scant bit of dignity."
Click to expand...

Two NOTW journalists were arrested in 2006 for hacking into the phones of the Royal Family, that was a direct result of investigations by other papers, notably the Daily Mail, publishing articles about it for at least 2-3 years before that. That you don't know that is hardly surprising, you had never heard anything about this at all until last week.

Rupert Murdoch should never have been allowed to get his hands on so many media outlets in the UK in the first place. By contrast, he had to become a US citizen before he could take over Fox.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
well, that wasn't really a readers digest version, but let's see if I have this right.


brooks, CEO of news of the world, handles a matter of criminal acts committed by SOMEONE in her company, and lots of people want to charge her with the crime? as well as murdoch?
Click to expand...

No that's not right, she sanctioned the hacking, it was her baby instigated by her from the beginning. Maybe this video will help you to understand? There is a version in Chinese as well!!


http://www.nma.tv/murdoch-pulls-plug-news-world-notw/
 
Last edited:
Damocles said:
Some dudes that worked for a company in Britain, who had a CEO (some woman I can't remember her name) who apparently should be psychic... Anyway his son runs operations in the UK, hence these people worked for his company. These people hacked into cell phone voice mail accounts deleting messages and doing other mischief to keep hope alive for a family/families with missing kids. They hacked some soldier's voice mail as well. They got caught.
Click to expand...

For an intelligent person you are remarkably uninformed at times, they didn't hack into Milly Dowler's voicemail to keep hope alive for the family. Messages were deleted as the mailbox was full and they wanted to see if any new messages arrived. Whether they knew if she was dead or not at that time, she was as it happens, was not an issue that concerned them or the fact that it seriously impeded the police inquiries and gave false hope to the family. Rebekah Brooks has now been arrested so it isn't just me that thinks she has a lot to answer for.
 
tom prendergast said:
The "kidnapped girl" was had already been murdered and they hacked into her voicemail to delete some messages as it was full. This gave the family and the police the false hope that she was still alive. How you can possibly compare that with Palin is beyond me.They also hacked into the accounts of several thousand others including 7/7 victims and now the FBI is investigating whether 9/11 relatives accounts were hacked as well.
Click to expand...
Weren't the police well aware of this shit ?....thats what I seem to remember from your link about the case......

The girl was dead, nothing would have changed.....the police could have and should have let the family know what was going on....

.... the crime is hacking, period.....not murder or emotional distress....the family can sue for damages....

which caused more distress....knowing shes dead or the hope that she might be alive ?
 
bravo said:
Weren't the police well aware of this shit ?....thats what I seem to remember from your link about the case......

The girl was dead, nothing would have changed.....the police could have and should have let the family know what was going on....

.... the crime is hacking, period.....not murder or emotional distress....the family can sue for damages....

which caused more distress....knowing shes dead or the hope that she might be alive ?
Click to expand...

No they weren't aware of it, how could they be? All they knew, at the time, was that her voicemail box was stlll being accessed so they drew the logical conclusion that she was alive. This seriously impeded the police investigation.

I think you know as well as I do that if this had happened in America, with a non Murdoch owned media outlet, then the culprits would have been burned at the stake with Faux News sending out for more wood!!
 
tom prendergast said:
No they weren't aware of it, how could they be? All they knew, at the time, was that her voicemail box was stlll being accessed so they drew the logical conclusion that she was alive. This seriously impeded the police investigation.

I think you know as well as I do that if this had happened in America, with a non Murdoch owned media outlet, then the culprits would have been burned at the stake with Faux News sending out for more wood!!
Click to expand...

Picture of tumbleweed, you will have to imagine the sound of the wind howling.


tumbleweed.jpg
 
Ice Dancer said:
As per usual Tom you ignore the facts in order to push your agenda. The facts are that a few scurrilous people acted in a deplorable way. There are NO facts that Murdoch was either knowledgeable or complicit-. The idea that a rag sheet would stoop to this level of behavior is neither shocking nor surprising. These kinds of publications are riff with below the belt journalism. Go after the actual perpetrators- if at the end of the day FACTS can be shown to tie Murdoch to knowledge and therefore complicity, then you can bring your pitchfork to the bonfire with at least a scant bit of dignity.
Click to expand...

You know the facts, do you Ice Prancer? Did you squeeze your backside into a time machine and fly forward to see the results of several ongoing investigations? Or are you just assuming that you know the facts to accuse poor Tom of ignoring them?

And besides, Tom's point is correct, what happened to good old fashioned 'the buck stops here'? Obviously doewsn't apply to the Right Wing Media....
 
AnyOldIron said:
You know the facts, do you Ice Prancer? Did you squeeze your backside into a time machine and fly forward to see the results of several ongoing investigations? Or are you just assuming that you know the facts to accuse poor Tom of ignoring them?

And besides, Tom's point is correct, what happened to good old fashioned 'the buck stops here'? Obviously doewsn't apply to the Right Wing Media....
Click to expand...

No Oldlimpy I don't know all the fact and neither do you or Tom. In fact. I do believe that my point was let's get all the facts before we castigate and implicate Murdoch. Tom was not accused by me of ignoring facts <read much?> He was accused of jumping out ahead of the facts because he hates Murdoch...

Yeah, well then, let's allow bnama to have his ass handed to him for not doing more about the ongoing investigations about how oil rigs were maintained and inspected...prior to the BP oil spill and explosion.
 
AnyOldIron said:
You know the facts, do you Ice Prancer? Did you squeeze your backside into a time machine and fly forward to see the results of several ongoing investigations? Or are you just assuming that you know the facts to accuse poor Tom of ignoring them?

And besides, Tom's point is correct, what happened to good old fashioned 'the buck stops here'? Obviously doewsn't apply to the Right Wing Media....
Click to expand...

I can just imagine her defending Nixon in much the same way as she is defending the Dirty Digger.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/video/skyu...n-hackgate-is-the-new-watergate-25991704.html
 
No Oldlimpy I don't know all the fact and neither do you or Tom. In fact. I do believe that my point was let's get all the facts before we castigate and implicate Murdoch.

On the contrary, you stated:

The facts are that a few scurrilous people acted in a deplorable way.
Click to expand...

This is quite catergorically yourself declaring the 'facts'.

Tom was not accused by me of ignoring facts <read much?> He was accused of jumping out ahead of the facts because he hates Murdoch...

Not only do I read, but I have the ability to flick back to check your posts

As per usual Tom you ignore the facts in order to push your agenda.
Click to expand...

Oops....
 
AnyOldIron said:
No Oldlimpy I don't know all the fact and neither do you or Tom. In fact. I do believe that my point was let's get all the facts before we castigate and implicate Murdoch.

On the contrary, you stated:
Click to expand...

Yes, and my statement still stands- So far the facts are that a few scurrilous people acted badly. You have facts that prove this statement wrong?
This is quite catergorically yourself declaring the 'facts'.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's me declaring the facts that are so far known~ You are on a roll!

Tom was not accused by me of ignoring facts <read much?> He was accused of jumping out ahead of the facts because he hates Murdoch...
Not only do I read, but I have the ability to flick back to check your posts
Click to expand...

You don't say??? Really- you mean you can actually go back and read my posts <look of amazement>

Oops....
Click to expand...

I'll say~
 
Yes, and my statement still stands- So far the facts are that a few scurrilous people acted badly. You have facts that prove this statement wrong?
Click to expand...

That's not what you stated. You said that "The facts are that a few scurrilous people acted in a deplorable way." No 'So far' included, as if the investigation had ended and that is the definitive.

And yes, evidence has come to light that knowledge of phone hacking was widespread within News International, testimony from Stephen Hoare, a former News of the World journalist, who has since been found dead in mysterious circumstances.

And Rebekah Brooks has already testified to Parliament that she had knowledge of corruption of police by News International in 2003. Are you telling me that Murdoch, who is so close to Brooks, wouldn't also know about this, or in the 8 years between then and now hadn't inquired into journalistic ethics in his papers?

It seems the notion of the buck stopping with the man at the top doesn't apply to the corrupt right wing leaning media.
 
AnyOldIron said:
That's not what you stated. You said that" The facts are that a few scurrilous people acted in a deplorable way. No 'So far' included, as if the investigation had ended and that is the definitive.

And yes, evidence has come to light that knowledge of phone hacking was widespread within News International, testimony from Stephen Hoare, a former News of the World journalist, who has since been found dead in mysterious circumstances.

And Rebekah Brooks has already testified to Parliament that she had knowledge of corruption of police by News International in 2003. Are you telling me that Murdoch, who is so close to Brooks, wouldn't also know about this, or in the 8 years between then and now hadn't inquired into journalistic ethics in his papers?

It seems the notion of the buck stopping with the man at the top doesn't apply to the corrupt right wing leaning media.
Click to expand...

Yes, and in the same post I said this: if at the end of the day FACTS can be shown to tie Murdoch to knowledge and therefore complicity, then you can bring your pitchfork to the bonfire with at least a scant bit of dignity. Most people would be able to understand that my first comment, when finished with this last one, indicates that I understood that not all of the facts were necessarily in... read much?

Brooks said that she knew some had hacked in 2003...she also said she personally did not know of any hacking recently. If they can prove that she did- then and only then, can you or anyone else claim different-and the same applies to Murdoch. He ultimately does engender responsibility- if not criminally then most certainly he does so with his reputation-but that is no different then any corporation or small business owner in his position.
 
tom prendergast said:
For an intelligent person you are remarkably uninformed at times, they didn't hack into Milly Dowler's voicemail to keep hope alive for the family. Messages were deleted as the mailbox was full and they wanted to see if any new messages arrived. Whether they knew if she was dead or not at that time, she was as it happens, was not an issue that concerned them or the fact that it seriously impeded the police inquiries and gave false hope to the family. Rebekah Brooks has now been arrested so it isn't just me that thinks she has a lot to answer for.
Click to expand...

Right. Uninformed. My synopsis was generally accurate. And I posted the thread when she was arrested. Which changes nothing about what I posted.

Whether they did it to "keep hope alive" it did, and that was a cruelty. What they did was pretty danged awful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top