Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
...what's all that about then?
It’s the first major test of whether or not this government really is the upholder of civil liberties it claims to be.
I've read blog entries and articles and the New York Times piece and other than feeling like everyone involved is a shady character and that a lot is being kept hush hush I can't seem to get a grip on how serious this is or what the repercussions might be
Is the UK really looking at a situation where a foreign owned media corporation has the Metropolitan Police and many of the country's leading MPs effectively in their back pocket?
or is the Met simply saying that if you bug phones for the purposes of spying or terrorism you are the incarnation of evil but if you bug phones for profit that's not worth bothering with ?
Also, there seems to be some odd legal protocol stuff too
A journalist's notepad with the name JOHN PRESCOTT scribbled on it IS evidence, you idiot. Not very good evidence, particularly if it's in crayon or something, but it's still evidence.
I mean, clearly Coulson knew what was going on with the hacking and the NotW let Goodman and Mulclaire take the fall over what appears a whole culture of illegal activity - that seems a given.
But why would the Met not pursue further investigation and charges in the first place?
I read on one blog that Scotland Yard/Senior officers itself had been bugged by NotW
Have NotW held the Met to ransom? Do they have something on the Menezes case? Another case? Something personal? Some corruption in the force?
What could it be?
This could turn into a MASSIVE scandal. I wouldn't trust the Met to be in charge of a reopenned investigation without the IPCC investigating the Met's initial response to the case
Cos loads of their stuff has been used for criminal prosecutions
Sounds like they didn't want to ruffle too many feathers and rock the boat with a good source of public conscious arrests.
Isn't this the bit in the film where one good cop dedicates his life to bringing the bastards to justice?
On the sport side of things, it's not that many: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/sep/03/news-of-world-entrapment-sport
one of the key officers in the case now works for News International, but I can’t find anything confirming this for definite. Do you know anything about it?
Andy Hayman, who headed the original inquiry into the phone-hacking affair, now writes for the Times.
is this justifiable or just blustery old fart nationalism/protectionism ?
a) it's the daddy of all scandals or
b) it's just the Guardian clutching at straws.
At the time, the whole 'oh the editor knew nothing about what any of his staff were doing' was deeply suspicious.
The resignation criteria is an interesting one though, considering Christopher Myers' 'twin-rooms' non-scandal. Mind you, I always thought the 'incompetent or lying' situation was pretty applicable to Blair though...
I thought the "becoming the story" line was his own particular take on it. ("I'm not resigning because I've done anything wrong..." etc etc)
Person X is pretty much proven to be either a massive liar or they're an ignoramus.
And so, as the lesser of two evils, they claim ignorance.
There was a time when ignorance wasn't considered an adequate line of defence.
And yet recently, these shysters seem to be able to come out with a half-baked apology, wait until the storm has blown over, and then carry on as if nothing happened.
have started doing a team stupid vs team evil when commenting on a story, with on commentator arguing that whatever behaviour has occurred is a result of incompetence and the other just arguing that they're straight up evil. it's simple but effective.
i should look it up.
but that in all likeliness not a great deal will be done, and no-one's really going to be that bothered.
A fairly important figure in the british government set-up appears to be a proper criminal. Perhaps i'm just being a bit naive, i should get back to tutting at all that mean old corruption in the wire.
on the one hand looms the prospect that a man who lied in court about the bugging and hacking of members of the Royal family and leading politicians has helped bring into Government a regime that he has enormous influence over and thus has great power within the framework of the nation
On the other hand, this fact seems to be dwarfed by the suggestion that a foreign news organisation can have such massive influence as to quosh a Scotland Yard investigation into its own practices
but unless there is some kind of 'Deep Throat' and 'Smoking Gun' then it does seem very likely that nothing will be done
What a horrible thought though that NI and the Met may be in some kind of symbiotic relationship of PR and protectionism
is just the more blatant side, which is in itself pretty disconcerting. The stuff about NI and the Met is all a bit deeper and murkier.
I can appreciate that the section that deals with counter-terrorism and protection of the royal family might have been a bit busy with all that terrorism malarkey AT THE TIME, but the fact that everything else has been dropped and people left uninformed despite the evidence being available is just bewildering (depressing).
haven't you rather missed an opportunity to accuse the Labour Party of falling asleep at their watch and letting the original investigation fall between the cracks?
Can't you find some pithy remark about Prescott only giving a shit now he's in opposition?
or do you think the Royal Correspondent was hacking the FA Chief Executive just as a hobby liek, on his days off and that
it's a bit of a non-story eh?
Aye. That'd be cos no-on euses it. And if they do, I sack the site off rather than installing an unwanted plugin.
"If you have trouble installing Silverlight, please either contact your I.T. administrator, or see help available at Microsoft"
Or, how about the government stops pissing my money away on a Microsoft-pushed folly?
Obviously no-one in the coalition can slag off their own head of communications or whatever he is, so they've got to go along with the whole 'no, of course he didn't know anything about it, let's just move on yeah?'
But this isn't just a case of someone being a bit dodgy or a bit of sleaze, surely the things he's been accused of are properly illegal?!
the news over here doesn't say anything about this...
whether or not it's been picked up anywhere else, I don't know.
Bear in mind that in this country, it's only the Guardian, Independent and (today) the BBC that have mentioned it.
I think after the BBC running with it as their lead story all day and the stuff this afternoon in parliament, it's got too big for everyone to ignore.
I can't help thinking that this is a MASSIVE scandal and at some point Cameron is going to either have to dump Coulson or get dumped himself
the bigger scandal though is the influence of News International on both sides of the House AND the Metropolitan police, it's really, truly shocking
A full public enquiry is needed really but ... hey, shut up man - Tesco Mary is on xfactor
is it still availible on whatever C4's version of iPlayer is?
watched it late last night, but was too sleepy to really take it in. Some pretty damning stuff as expected, although it did feel in the last section that it was more agenda driven than anything else.
This one probably needs the few sections of the media that've been running with it to keep digging for some time yet unfortunately.
Has it been pulled now? Why? And by what no doubt sinister forces?
i watched it last night on youtbe 4od but its gone now.
...even though it didn't tell me much that I already didn't know.
I find News International absolutely repugnant, the one thing that really wound me up during the election was when Rebekah Brooks and James Murdoch stormed the office of the editor of the Independent and berated him for daring to run an ad saying something along the lines of Rupert Murdoch won't decide this election.
quite lidderally brad and circuses
*bread and circuses, obv.