howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#1
big story coming from them.
it would appear that the "news of the screws" have been caught tapping the phones of public figures.
out of court settlements have been made.
the editor at the time is now a close aide of boy dave.
will be interesting to see how the story unfolds.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#2
having seen newsnight with andrew neill giving his opinion, it would appear that the chum of our leader in waiting was fully aware of what has been going on.
all news international publications have been using the info gained by the eavesdropping.
so far mr murdoch has paid out about a million used oncers on "settling", if this had been in the states(with their stricter laws), it would have been many billions.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#3
allegedly, howard, allegedly.....
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#4
barryw,if its alleged it could and might be proved,this wholly depends on what info they have aquired.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#5
Merely suggesting that you should take care in making assertions that may not be true - you could end up in very hot water.
Innocent until proven guilty.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#6
barryw,keep your hair on,just making a point.or does the truth hurt.is it because dc and his mates have been rumbled in this case.
#7
Allegedly is a useful term.............safety etc etc!!!
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#8
Exactly what has DC been rumbled over Brian? Remember you have already sailed very close to something that is actionable, hence my warning.
The allegations against Andy Coulson were regarding matters that happened at his newspaper, before he worked for the Conservatives. You should also be made aware that there is a 'back story' about Coulson's resignation that could shine a very diffferent light on things.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#9
I mentioned the 'back story' because I could not remember details but here is this extract from the Spectator that places this allegation into the correct perspective:
""""We already knew that the Tory communications chief resigned the editorship of the NotW after a phone-hacking scandal involving the royal editor Clive Goodman. And we already knew that he claimed no knowledge of the hacking but, as editor, he took responsibility for it. No evidence has yet emerged that Coulson was more implicated than he's letting on. Indeed, the only new finding in the Guardian story is that around £1million was paid out to some phone-hacking victims after Coulson had resigned the editorship.""""
So be careful what you are suggesting - egg all over your face Brian might be the lesser of your concerns.
Sid Pollitt
#10
I'd like to suggest, if it's ok, that this brings the judgement of David Cameron into the spotlight again.
#11
Allegedly.........................!
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#12
and allegedly being invetegated by the police acording to a news report ive heard.so alledgely there might be somthing in it.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#13
barry
you have often quoted andrew neill, ex editor of a major broadsheet.
the same chap, on newsnight, stated that it was not possible for an editor not to know that such behaviour was going on
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#14
Police say there is no new evidence and no investigation.
Andy Coulson's involvement was known 2 1/2 years ago publically, he resigned as editor accepting responsibility though he knew nothing, something no-one including the police have contradicted.
Parallels have been drawn to the McBride affair, the big difference is that Brown did not do the right thing, take responsibility and resign the way Coulson did.
DC was clearly correct in standing by Coulson as a matter of simple justice and fairness given the lack of anything new. He is to be admired for doing that and not taking the political route of sacking him.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#15
Here is a news link to confirm what I said above...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8143120.stm
The truth is that this was an attempted political stitch up and it certainly looks as if the Guardian and certain Labour figures have fallen flat on their faces (as have a couple of people on this forum).
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#16
barryw,i am still standing.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#17
the director of public prosecution is holding and inquiry into the whole thing, he has asked for documents from the original investigation.
interestingly enough, i got this information from the free market itv teletext service.
the reds under the beds bbc service has no mention of it.
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
#18
Barry it may be impossible to prove in a court of law but there is no way an editor of a national paper did not know how information was being sourced for stories. A bright boy, as I am sure he is, will have made sure there was no evidential chain to implicate him
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
#19
Ross im with you on this one, and Editor that doesnt know whats going on with his reporters? he probably knew, but he did the right thing and reesigned, the bigger worry is the phone tapping, it should not be allowed unless justified against national security
this whole issue needs looking into, although this chappy may havre gone to pastures new, it doesnt get away from the actual phone tapping, that needs sorting
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#20
Hulme of the Liberal Democrats said yesterday in the House that this chap is on a par with Damien McBride, the nasty email proliferator for Labour that Gordon Brown sacked. I know this has been referred to earlier...but if the comparisons are being drawn why is David Cameron defending his man while Gordon Brown sacked his.
Surely it is enough that Coulson is being referred to in the same boat as McBride to warrant sacking.