Weaver95: now THAT was a great headline!

this thing just isn't looking good for Rupert.

This thing isn't looking good for Murdoch, the police, and the Prime Minister. It's gone all quagmire on them.

Jesus, and I thought Fox News was friendly with Bush. This makes that relationship look like OJ's marriage AFTER the murder.

Since it got redlit, here's a very angry WSJ editorial furious that people are linking the actions of News Corp to it's subsidiary papers. It's pretty hilarious.

Oh pls pls pls let evidence surface that Murdoch was *directly* involved with bribing scotland yard officials.

the opposite of charity is justice: Oh pls pls pls let evidence surface that Murdoch was *directly* involved with bribing scotland yard officials.

That won't happen. What will happen is News Corp stockholders kicking out Murdoch because of they are losing money.

GAT_00: Since it got redlit, here's a very angry WSJ editorial furious that people are linking the actions of News Corp to it's subsidiary papers. It's pretty hilarious.

That editorial contains so much spin that my clothes are now dry.

cameroncrazy1984: GAT_00: Since it got redlit, here's a very angry WSJ editorial furious that people are linking the actions of News Corp to it's subsidiary papers. It's pretty hilarious.

That editorial contains so much spin that my clothes are now dry.

Yep, and totally glossed over the fact that Les Hinton lied and covered up the phone hacking scandal a couple of years ago....

the opposite of charity is justice: Oh pls pls pls let evidence surface that Murdoch was *directly* involved with bribing scotland yard officials.

You might get evidence that Murdoch's son knew about it and abetted it, in which case he's up the creek. Actual evidence Rupert knew and abetted it, might be harder to come by. Then again, people were saying there's no way Rebekah Brooks was going to be arrested.

Its one of those things where either Murdoch was monumentally not in control of his own employees or he was criminally complicit. Not very strong when your ideal position is "old and stupid."

Can someone remind me what the address to write to for a 'what's all this then' T-shirt is?

But the CIA was hacked, why aren't we paying attention to that? And also, Citi and Bank of America, and other great banks. Where is the outrage?

Notabunny: GAT_00: Since it got redlit, here's a very angry WSJ editorial furious that people are linking the actions of News Corp to it's subsidiary papers. It's pretty hilarious.

That made me dizzy. They should sell tickets for that ride.

same paragraph It is also worth noting the irony of so much moral outrage (...) The understandable outrage in this case stems from the hacking of a noncelebrity, the murder victim Milly Dowler.

Yeah, you get the feeling that the piece wasn't really edited, just stream of consciousness desperation.

surprising how close the media and cops were.

WTF Indeed: It's gone all quagmire on them.

Rupert, I'd love to come. But, what's happened, you see, is the string in my leg's gone.

Too bad nobody cares that the same tactics are still going on now in America... land of the free

Mark my words: No matter what happens to Murdoch in the UK, he will be just fine in the US. They're not going to lock him up, and he has a significant percentage of Americans convinced that all media outlets are just as evil as his are.

Even if everything else goes bad, he'll just move here and live out his days as the billionaire CEO of FOX News, happily ever after the end.

zedster: GAT_00: Since it got redlit, here's a very angry WSJ editorial furious that people are linking the actions of News Corp to it's subsidiary papers. It's pretty hilarious.

At least three British investigations into phone-hacking and payments to police and others by the now-shuttered News of the World tabloid are underway, with 10 arrests so far. News Corp. and its executives have apologized profusely and are cooperating with authorities. Phone-hacking is illegal, and it is up to British authorities to enforce their laws. If Scotland Yard failed to do so adequately when the hacking was first uncovered several years ago, then that is more troubling than the hacking itself.



Sorry I hacked your dead daughters phone, we cool now?

IF YOU PAYED OFF THE COPS TO COVER IT UP THAT MAKES YOU JUST AS GUILTY DUMBASS

Haha, yeah, that's as far as I got before I couldn't stomach any more. 'Hacking is a crime sure, but Scotland Yard's failure to act on criminal activity is the real story here.' *Brushes bribery charges under the rug* 'Why can't government do anything right?'

/Here is Brooks admitting to paying police for information is 2003

Godscrack: All the dominoes are falling. The network that brought you "God is the boss" "God hates gays" "God hates blacks" "God hates women" "God hates anyone who isn't rich and white" will finally see the real God.

Even if Murdoch doesn't see a court date, the whole world knows his brand, and his affiliates, are frauds.

PRAI$E THE LQRD

And they will still vote Republican

gilgigamesh: That piece reeked of desperation and fear.

Fear. WSJ is another Murdoch property, after all, and of course News Corp. is using every tool at its disposal to deflect blame away from Rupert Murdoch. So many people are falling on swords to protect this asshat, it's ridiculous.

Godscrack: Even if Murdoch doesn't see a court date, the whole world knows his brand, and his affiliates, are frauds.

They're not frauds. They're just bastards. The difference is simple: a fraud makes up an article about imaginary voice-mails in a missing young girl's phone, a bastard actually acquires access to the voice-mails, deletes some of the mail and hopes more info will come in.

Not to make myself look like an idiot, but I'm not even sure how they got access to the voice-mails, not the pin number, the way they got to the place you put in the pin. I wasn't aware I could access it from a phone other than my own.

Enough of this, onward tot he next "America suxors because it is run by corporations" thread

Jurodan: Godscrack: Even if Murdoch doesn't see a court date, the whole world knows his brand, and his affiliates, are frauds.

They're not frauds. They're just bastards. The difference is simple: a fraud makes up an article about imaginary voice-mails in a missing young girl's phone, a bastard actually acquires access to the voice-mails, deletes some of the mail and hopes more info will come in.

Not to make myself look like an idiot, but I'm not even sure how they got access to the voice-mails, not the pin number, the way they got to the place you put in the pin. I wasn't aware I could access it from a phone other than my own.

Apparently, according to another poster in an earlier thread, they spoofed the phone numbers of their victims, so that the phone company thought it was the owners phone, in order to access the message bank. Doing this also meant that, a lot of the time, you didn't even need a PIN to access the messages. Using a spoofing program to break into others message banks is very much illegal.

I see lawsuits. lots and lots of lawsuits. thousands of lawsuits. ex service members, 911 victims,celebrities,politicians all filing suits. the royal family could throw Murdoch in the tower. Tourists could visit him.

GAT_00: Since it got redlit, here's a very angry WSJ editorial furious that people are linking the actions of News Corp to it's subsidiary papers. It's pretty hilarious.

I've taken the liberty of condensing each paragraph for those without the time to read the whole thing:


All this tish tosh is a threat to the free press!

If Scotland Yard failed to uncover the phone hacking then that's a real problem for the Yard. If it turns out we paid police to turn a blind eye, then it was an overzealous staffer, non-story.

Other papers are scum, too.

Politicians want positive coverage in the media, therefore they are liars.

Yes, our publisher resigned but he was a really good guy.

Why? Because he made money.

Also, he once did something nice in Singapore.

Our paper is excellent because we sell a lot of them.

Other journalists are just jealous.

Rupert Murdoch saved this paper!

Yes, the US government is now investigating but AG Eric Holder didn't even say good-bye to the First Amendment.

We really don't like the foreign-bribery law.

It's a threat to journalism!

Threat!

Phone hacking is bad.

I'd call them idiots, but apparently we're not supposed to do that anymore on here.

This might be the gift that keeps on giving. Im wondering what will happen when the fallout hits Newcorp US

Will anything happen to the pigs involved?

Colonel Klink? He runs Scotland yard?

GWSuperfan: Dr.Zom: Phone hacking is bad. but it's only bad if it's done to a non-celebrity. Celebrities are fair game, though.

FTFY

That wasn't in that paragraph, but it was implied earlier in the piece by:

The understandable outrage in this case stems from the hacking of a noncelebrity, the murder victim Milly Dowler.

Good catch. It was echoed by Paul McMullen (NOTW reporter) on British TV with Hugh Grant when he implied that it was okay to hack Grant's phone because he was a celebrity and some guy making 200 quid a week wouldn't have sympathy for a movie star. So that made it okay.

Link (new window)

Jurodan Wrote:

"Not to make myself look like an idiot, but I'm not even sure how they got access to the voice-mails, not the pin number, the way they got to the place you put in the pin. I wasn't aware I could access it from a phone other than my own."


Think spoofed Caller ID and the account is set up to not require the PIN based on that Caller ID...

WhyteRaven74: the opposite of charity is justice: Oh pls pls pls let evidence surface that Murdoch was *directly* involved with bribing scotland yard officials.

You might get evidence that Murdoch's son knew about it and abetted it, in which case he's up the creek. Actual evidence Rupert knew and abetted it, might be harder to come by. Then again, people were saying there's no way Rebekah Brooks was going to be arrested.

If I remember rightly a US company can be in massive trouble if their employees bribed foreign officials even if the executives knew nothing about it.

Pssst, Rupert. Seppuku is still an option.

What could have possibly made him think hiring a former tabloid journo to do PR would work out well?

Quitting the job amidst an ethic's scandal to be closer to the family?





/approves

FuturePastNow: What could have possibly made him think hiring a former tabloid journo to do PR would work out well?

The rich and powerful get t a point where they see everything that stands in their way as a nuisance, a minor detail or an insignificance that doesn't hold any concern for them because they can just make a phone call or throw money at it.

And there's the rub. Because... see, even if you have more money than Croesus, your life doesn't turn into a pleasant garden of rainbow farting unicorns and hot and cold running everything delivered by nude vestal virgins. And even if it did, you'd still be bored off your ass.

Even billionaires get up in the morning, fart, scratch their ass, make some toast, pop a couple of aspirins and look for something to do. And when you're used to getting anything you ask, you start to trip over dick. Hubris is the occupational hazard of power and it's why it corrupts.

When everything that's good and useful and legal is stacked three deep in the closet of your summer house, it gets boring and you start looking for forbidden fruit. Simply because you think you can get away with it. This is nothing more than the obvious results of bad ideas held by flatulent, pushy, self-important men with too much money.