George Galloway sues over NoTW ‘phone hacking’
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Couchtripper Forum Index -> Pirty's Purgatory
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
luke



Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Location: by the sea

PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2011 4:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

anyone else watching the murdoch's in front of the select committee?

someone just hit or threw something at rupert murdoch, his wife jumped up and whacked whoever it was Laughing

thing is, they've had cameras set up good all the way through, but for that moment they've got the shittest camera angles so you can't fully see what happened

edit - looks like it was shaving foam;

Jane Martinson reports from the hearing: "He was sitting four rows back, calmly walked up with a plate of shaving foam - smacked it in Rupert's face - Wendi intervened."

edit edit - thats murdoch's wife getting a slap in



edit edit edit - from the new statesmen;

17.09 The protester who attacked Rupert Murdoch is actually Jonathan May-Bowles. According to UKuncut's Twitter feed, it was not a UKuncut action and May-Bowles was acting alone.

Here is his tweet before he launched his attack:

It is a far better thing that I do now than I have ever done before #splat

16.57 Wendi Deng leapt in "like a praying mantis", according to my colleague.

another edit - just before or after the moment of pie impact

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
faceless
admin


Joined: 25 Apr 2006

PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2011 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

if he's charged, she better be charged with assault too. Her crime was worse than his.

The way the committee kissed his arse for being 'brave' enough to continue questions was sickening. They should have been the ones throwing pies at the corrupt bastards.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
luke



Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Location: by the sea

PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2011 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

faceless wrote:
if he's charged, she better be charged with assault too. Her crime was worse than his.


i don't really agree with that, she was acting to defend her husband - he's an old man, i think she was pretty cool to jump in like that. his son didn't do much!

faceless wrote:
The way the committee kissed his arse for being 'brave' enough to continue questions was sickening.


yeah that was pretty sickening, and so was the quality of most of the questioning except the labour guy tom watson
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
faceless
admin


Joined: 25 Apr 2006

PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2011 4:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

She committed an actual assault when she wasn't personally at risk. As for him being an old man - that doesn't change the fact that he's a disgusting fucker who's overseen his editors relishing in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of 'terrorists'.

Also, how did the guy get covered in the foam himself? During the incident that we saw he wasn't affected, so I can only presume that someone did that as revenge - making that person guilty of any crime that he may be charged with.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
luke



Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Location: by the sea

PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2011 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

faceless wrote:
She committed an actual assault when she wasn't personally at risk.


i say fair play to her for defending her grandad husband

faceless wrote:
As for him being an old man - that doesn't change the fact that he's a disgusting fucker who's overseen his editors relishing in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of 'terrorists'.


i totally agree with that, i can't stand his media, or a lot of the rest of the media
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
faceless
admin


Joined: 25 Apr 2006

PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2011 5:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If she cares about her husband, then she must be as beneath contempt as he is and her violence (as opposed to the protestor's comic aggression) speaks volumes about the level of contempt they have for anyone who dares challenge them.

She's probably been wanting to hit someone for ages - with the rage building inside her since she first realised that their position within governmental/royal circles was at risk.

I really hope he pushes for her to be charged so that she can be quizzed about the exact level of threat she perceived from a 'custard pie'.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
luke



Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Location: by the sea

PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2011 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i don't know much about her to be fair, so i have no idea what shes like or how much or not she knows about murdoch's news empire.

i did read comments on the fox news site the other day thats shes a chinese communist mole working to overtake the murdoch empire Laughing but you get a lot of strange comments on the fox news site

i'd say she just reacted automatically without thinking, it all happened so quick - she might not even have known what the guy threw at murdoch. i watched it live and i didn't have a clue - although she would have had a far better view than me

can you remember what happened to that woman who threw the green soup ( i think it was ) at mandelson a few years ago? and theres that short female labour ex minister - didn't she have eggs or something thrown at her? i was just wondering what usually happens to people like this. i mean, its not a serious attack or anything
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
faceless
admin


Joined: 25 Apr 2006

PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2011 5:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You don't need to know her personal history to know that to marry someone like Murdoch she'd have to be a soulless corporate scumbag at the very least.

I've met enough of these people in the past and they are concerned only with their position and wealth - and they have utter contempt for people who don't have as much as them or who won't submit to them. They're weak, despicable excuses for human beings who rely on heavy and outrageous tactics to get what they want.

fuck em! haha

Here's a gallery that the telgraph have knocked together of previous eggings etc...

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
luke



Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Location: by the sea

PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2011 9:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

haha i'd forgotten about a lot of those, class Smile

i was just checking the guardian and they got this thing so you can see what was most popular on twitter through the hearing, and apparently this is the most retweeted message;

james murdoch is a bit slimy. he looks the type who'd kick the fuck out of a penguin for no valid reason. just for a laugh. a fucking laugh

Laughing

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/interactive/2011/jul/19/rupert-murdoch-twitter-pie
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
luke



Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Location: by the sea

PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2011 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

did anyone catch channel 4 news today? galloway was supposed to be on, but i forgot all about it

he's written an article for al jazeera

Murdoch empire sinking beneath the sands
A phone-hacking scandal is exposing shady ties between the UK's political elite and a right-wing media baron.

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/07/20117181848649939.html

a couple of blog posts on today from craig murray;

Murdoch Circus

I find it hard to believe that anybody can watch today’s clutch of Select Committee hearings without coming away with one overwhelming impression; the extraordinarily low quality of the UK’s Members of Parliament. With the noble exception of Tom Watson, I don’t think anyone has enhanced their reputation today. I have often blogged about the fact that for centuries Parliament contained many of the intellectually brilliant, of a whole variety of political persuasions, but beyond doubt amongst the most outstanding minds and extraordinary people of their generation. This was still true in my earlier lifetime.

Parliament nowadays is full of dull party hacks of a middle management mentality. The number of parliamentarians I would enjoy sitting next to at dinner, is tiny. How many parliamentarians would you enjoy a dinner with? Most of them are in it, not to serve their country, but as a career. What really agitates them is anything affecting their expenses and their pensions.

The Murdochs could bat away these pompous blunderers all day. Even the dull transatlantic management speak of James Murdoch baffles them. It is humiliating for this country that these dullards are our representatives.

Democratic Sham

If ever proof were needed that our political system is a pretend democracy, the abysmal performance of today’s select committees should remove any doubt. The lack of any tenacious or forensic questioning on just what people knew and just when they knew it, was startling. Rebecca Brooks apparently very seldom visited the paper she edited and had no idea what happened there. Nobody had any idea why they might be meeting the legal costs of assorted criminals. Nobody asked Brooks straight out exactly how much she knew about payments to coppers.

Most sycophantic of all was Louise Mensch, in her helpful attempts to ask questions revealing that all the News of the World did was the same as the rest of Fleet Street, and it had some good effects, like combating paedophiles. I lost count of mentions of Sara’s Law and paedophiles – no mention of the mob they incited to attack a paediatrician, though. These MPs are so used to asking servile questions at Prime Minister’s Question Time, they don’t seem to realise how they look to the rest of us.

If anybody had any doubt that most MP’s, News International and the top people at the Met are all part of the same corrupt governing political class, the scales must surely have dropped from the eyes now. What a pathetic bunch of parasites.

Sean Hoare Police Statement

Hertfordshire Police have issued a statement on the preliminary post mortem results:

There is no evidence of third party involvement and the death is non suspicious. Further toxicology results are now awaited and there is an on-going examination of health problems identified at the post mortem.

Please note, toxicology reports can take some weeks and we cannot make any further comments at on the post mortem, including the problems at this time


If I was the family I would call in an independent pathologist quickly. We all remember the first pathology report on Ian Tomlinson. Sean Hoare may indeed have died from natural causes, though it is unusual with modern communications for someone in their forties to do that with a suddenness that precludes a call for assistance. But unfortunately, the lies police told about Jean Charles De Menezes, the far too convenient first post mortem on Ian Tomlinson, and the lack of any inquest on David Kelly, means that it is no longer possible in this country simply to accept the word of the authorities on such things.

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
faceless
admin


Joined: 25 Apr 2006

PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2011 10:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote


Murdoch empire sinking beneath the sands
A phone-hacking scandal is exposing shady ties between the UK's political elite and a right-wing media baron.
George Galloway
Al Jazeera
18 Jul 2011

"Look on my works, ye mighty; and despair!" So said the base of the statue of Ozymandias of Egypt - Ramasses the Great, Pharaoh of the 19th Dynasty of Ancient Egypt - discovered deep under the desert sands in Shelley's epic poem Ozymandias. The poet's point being of course that though undoubtedly great, in his day, ultimately Ozymandias and his empire went the way of all flesh, and all empires. So it seems is going the empire of Rupert Murdoch, once the greatest media conglomerate the world has ever known.

Absolute carnage is currently being caused in British public life by the fall-out from the illegal phone hacking carried out by Murdoch's servants. In a story transfixing the country, there are often developments several times daily including arrests of powerful people and resignations from some of the best known public figures in the land.

Like all good scandals follow the money is the maxim. And the question made famous by Watergate - "What did he know and when did he know it?" is the one on everybody's lips. The "he" in question is, increasingly, the prime minister himself.

David Cameron is slowly sinking into the Murdoch quicksands for several reasons. His relations with Murdoch's top-brass, now under investigation, have turned out to be almost comically close. He was a "riding partner" of Rebekah Brooks, Murdoch's British CEO, who was arrested by police on Sunday.

Since becoming prime minister just fifteen months ago, Cameron has had 26 meetings with Murdoch's executives. Cameron's wife was likely the only person to get more meetings with the PM than Murdoch's executives. Cameron, against the advice of his deputy prime minister, employed former News of the World editor Andy Coulson as his communications director. Coulson, who has been at the centre of the hacking probe, was arrested on July 8, while his deputy was detained last week. This has snowballed, causing the resignation of Britain's top two policemen and several other senior Murdoch executives.

Two months after Coulson was finally pushed out of his official position as communications director, and was under criminal investigation for phone hacking, Cameron invited him to spend the weekend at Chequers, the British prime minister's country home. Such is the turmoil in London that respected commentators - on Monday for example Professor Roy Greenslade, the pre-eminent media pundit - are calling on Cameron's deputy Nick Clegg to table a motion of no confidence in the PM. Last week, that would have been a joke. Today it doesn't seem so funny, or unlikely.

I declare an interest. I was one of the first people to be informed by Scotland Yard - London's Metropolitan Police - that my phone was being hacked by a private investigator working for Mr Murdoch. They visited me in my office in parliament and told me this, so I began a legal action which is set to come before the courts in December.

It didn't surprise me all that much in the light of my role as a leader of Britain's anti-war movement, a champion of the Palestinian cause for over 35 years, and a defender of Muslims both at home and abroad. Even Mr Murdoch wouldn't dispute the fact that these are causes far from his own heart. This throws up a contradiction now coming more clearly into focus.

Prince Walid bin Talal bin Abdelaziz Al-Saud, the second biggest shareholder in News Corporation after Murdoch, recently gave an interview, on his yacht, to the BBC flagship programme Newsnight. The Saudi prince declared himself "a good friend" of Rupert Murdoch and his son James Murdoch (probably the next executive to be charged by the police in the scandal). He defended both men briskly, but in doing so drew attention to the fact that he is the second biggest shareholder in the Murdoch empire, and that the Murdochs were major shareholders in his own Rotana media empire in the Middle East.

An unholy alliance, surely? Mr Murdoch is the co-owner, with Prince Walid, of Fox News - one of the most virulently anti-Muslim television stations in the world. The station gives a megaphone to the likes of Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly and Sarah Palin. In the US, Fox's role was to throw gallons of petrol on the flames Islamophobia which were leading to the burning of the Holy Quran by vigilantes.

Then there is the so-called "Ground Zero Mosque" controversy. The planned building was, of course, not at Ground Zero. It was not a mosque but an Islamic centre. The centre was partially funded by Prince Walid, the co-owner with Murdoch of Islamophobic media fire-raisers including Fox News and the New York Post. Prince Walid it will be recalled was roundly insulted by the government of New York City when they returned the cheque he donated to the victims of the 9/11 attacks. A glutton for punishment no doubt.

Murdoch's newspapers in Britain are little better than their US-counterparts and include photographs and sexualised images which would never see the light of day in Riyadh, the Saudi capital. As a whole it is safe to say that Murdoch's nearly 200 newspapers - and his television stations in so far as he can compel the latter which are more tightly regulated - are bastions of fanatically pro-Israel, anti-Muslim bigotry. Yet they are co-owned by a member of the Saudi Royal family who not only approves of these practices, but regards the mogul Murdoch as his "good friend".

Murdoch's plans to take 100 per cent ownership of British Sky Broadcasting now lie in ruins like Ozymandias's broken statue. Aged 80, he may, at the pace we are moving, be ousted by his own shareholders before long.

His dream of a Sky Arabia, however, remains a clear and present danger. Like the tobacco manufacturers, the more they are run out of towns in the west the more they concentrate on selling their addictive poison in the east. NewsCorp, with Prince Walid, may be sailing your way. Beware of pirates ye Arabs.

------------------

Cheers for that Luke, I had a look on the Channel 4 site for video, but no immediate luck.

edit: it turns out his appearance was cancelled.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
major.tom
Macho Business Donkey Wrestler


Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Location: BC, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

luke wrote:
It is a far better thing that I do now than I have ever done before #splat


That's awesome! Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
luke



Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Location: by the sea

PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2011 8:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
luke



Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Location: by the sea

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote



seems a bit harsh, i don't remember anyone else ever going to prison for similar actions

edit - james whale has just said he should have got 5 years to act as a deterrent Shocked
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
faceless
admin


Joined: 25 Apr 2006

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

yeah, 6 weeks is just crazy. I've seen people get community service for real assaults and they are genuinely a threat to normal society.

This is a political move and I hope he can appeal it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Couchtripper Forum Index -> Pirty's Purgatory All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Couchtripper - 2005-2015