Phone hacking.

EC1 said:
knows where bodies are buried?

or innocent..you decide
Click to expand...

This is my thinking too, the editor of the paper who had a six year affair with the guy who was found guilty today and she knew nothing? Murdoch, Cameron & Blair as buddies, she must have an awful lot of dirt.
 
Jakers said:
This is my thinking too, the editor of the paper who had a six year affair with the guy who was found guilty today and she knew nothing? Murdoch, Cameron & Blair as buddies, she must have an awful lot of dirt.
Click to expand...

Not really. Ultimately it was down to the jury and unless yo are suggesting they have been "got at" , which would be somewhat risky to say the least, then that's that

I was saying to someone today that she comes across as quite charmless but of course you can't be convicted for that. They quickly pointed out that ey thought e same but knew someone who worked for her and can't speak highly enough of her as a boss

The worst aspect of the while business is the harm it did to to people, hacked. Especially downer. That was disgusting but no more so than the laywers in the actual case itself

The second worst is th ammunition it gives to those that hate freedom of the press
 
No not suggesting the jury were got at, at all, trial by jury is the best method by far and they can only decide a verdict based on the evidence put forward.
 
And to be fair, a relationship doesn't mean that everything is out in the open by any means

I would be a dead man if it was
 
Last edited:
Very true, though she must go down in history as the worse editor ever not to know about all her jurno's hacking 1000's of phone calls, still that ineptness got her a £2m golden handshake from the boss so proof you dont have to be clever to get a bonus, I must tell my boss that in the morning.
 
A girl who worked her way up from the bottom in a male dominated world to very successfully run biggest selling papers is another way of looking at it
 
Exactly, and after all that she gets the top job and then didn't have the nous to know all her journo's were hacking calls or to ask the question how do we get all these sensational scoops ? Hard to fathom really.
 
Well that's the big question and I agree with what you say. Doesn't add up but it's not a conviction
 
Cameron took a bit of a hammering there and be interesting to see what happens re the Gus O'Donnell question. He now looks unelectable to me, as the elctoral map is so against the tories. Lib-Lab coalition looks nailed on.
 
He is very electable. With the economy going the right way and few real blunders by the leadership (the public doesnt care about this issue frankly) i can see an overall majority. the anti fat blotaed lazy arrogant Juncker stance is i suspect, going down well with all sides

look what hes up against? An opposition leader with the worst ratings in memory. One whos pro public sector union and anti business stance is alienating swing voters and who is frankly the most unconvicing labour leader since the dreadful Kinnock. Labour need a Blair to win any share of power. Ed doesnt connect. Its as if they have forgotten what a superb politician Blair was
 
Last edited:
Yes. But i do not see a left leaning labour, with little appeal to the working private sector population breaking into enough seats in the south and midlands to make enough of an impact

Im indifferent about Cameron as a leader and a person but he doesnt make too many false moves.
 
Last edited:
Agree with most of that but they don't need to (that much) - I think it will almost certainly be a hung parliament and the obvious coalition would then be Lib-Lab.
 
If labour hadn't fcked up their own leadership election Cameron would be 100% gone next year..

With Louise Mensch, she is so stupid it's hard to know whether she is serious.
 
Do you think the economy is growing for the vast majority though Clive?
Click to expand...

Yes. Left wing bullshit about how it only benefits the rich doesn't stand any test.

to give an example..rates for contractors in the building game are going through the roof at the moment. They cannot keep men on site. They are walking off for better pay elsewhere.

Either way, with interest rates set to stay low and house prices still rising, unemployment falling, a huge number of people are benefiting and will continue to do so

I dont necessarily believe a different leader would make that much different unless they had exceptional talents, such as Blair.
 
clivex said:
Yes. Left wing bullshit about how it only benefits the rich doesn't stand any test.

to give an example..rates for contractors in the building game are going through the roof at the moment. They cannot keep men on site. They are walking off for better pay elsewhere.

Either way, with interest rates set to stay low and house prices still rising, unemployment falling, a huge number of people are benefiting and will continue to do so

I dont necessarily believe a different leader would make that much different unless they had exceptional talents, such as Blair.
Click to expand...

A decent rise in the minimum wage wouldn't go amiss either
 
If I had to vote for the best statesman I'd go for Cameron (he was right to go for the vote on Syria, Ed Milliband was wrong and I agree with Tony Blair about the knock on effect this has had on Iraq).
However, in terms of policy, I see very little in it, not a lot that is changeable even with a Labour government. They may scrap a few things but will be scared shitless to rock the economic boat in case of being labelled 'reckless' with the economy again
Coulson is the worse decision they've taken. Total failure of judgement, mistakes like that come back to haunt you.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top