Is she a woman more spinned against than sinning? The BBC certainly has no interest in finding out. But why?
A fact that is fairly relevant in the context and yet I certainly haven’t heard anything mentioned about it on any discussion about hacking on BBC radio. The story is buried in a BBC article about Ryan Giggs suing NOTW ..why would she allow herself to be ‘hacked’ if she knew the NoW private investigator was doing such things, especially at a time when she was in the headlines herself. It might suggest she didn’t know about ‘hacking’…a suggestion the anti Murdoch BBC might not want to propagate. But, of course, were that true, it would be evidence of systemic BBC bias which we all know does not exist since impartiality is in their DNA. UPDATE; Brooks has now been arrested as this strange non-story created traction between Leftist MSM and Police. |
BROOKING NO OPPOSITION…
Bookmark the permalink.
I find it quite amusing that the leftists (BBC/Guardian/Liebore) basically want to drive Murdoch away, but now there is talk of BSkyB being bought up by someone else.
So just who can afford the 8-10 billion it would cost to buy Sky? Well probably a rich Russian in the control of Putin or a rich Arab.
Well that will go down well, especially if as is quite likely they’d shut down Sky News (which is what the BBC want) and just run the profitable parts.
How that is supposed to be good for the nation is beyond me.
I think the axis of weasel would prefer ‘Press TV’ to buy it out than Murdo.
Why has Brookes been hacked? Really? Maybe because there is no honour in journalism? Because part of being a bad person working for a bad organisation is not having any sense of loyalty? Or because someone at NI wanted dirt on her for their own nefarious reasons? Take your pick.
Anyway we should look at this positively.
Murdoch is spiraling down and good riddance to bad rubbish. I rejoice in the destruction of an organisation that has done nothing but harm to this once great nation. I certainly won’t be pissing on that fire.
I’m hoping this story has the momentum to damn them all, including the vile treasonous Mirror Group and the odious Grauniad/BBC axis of evil. Let them all burn.
Hmm I would like to agree but I truly hate the idea that i have nothing but ‘hope’ that the evil empire gets burned over this!.
A bunch of jerks who is almost solely responsible for some award wining garbage that has derided and broken our religion/patriotism and politics into a childish game that now only they and their pet rags and tame Labour lap dogs get to pick the rules! against a bad organisation out for profit but has never once threatened me and my freedom !
I’ve copied this from another thread that immediately got buried. I feel my point is relevant to any thread on this subject:
The BBC is now in a particular position that they have to go after Murdoch and finish him off completely or else they are in trouble. If Murdoch survives, even seriously wounded as now, he will work to bring down the BBC and other hate-organs. Even if he doesn’t destroy them he could largely emasculate them and that is the fear that drives their current hysteria directed against him.
They weren’t worried about what Murdoch was up to in 2002 and 2006 because he supported the same side. It was only when he changed sides that they turned on him.
I’m hoping that Mr Murdoch and his friends have lots of dirt on bbc and guardeen employees and when the time is right, that he releases it, ensuring their destruction.
Well you can bet that the Murdoch press will be after the Guardian and BBC from now on, the local Cocaine dens in London will be top of the list.
Remember it was the NOTW that outed Richard Bacon as a white powder snorter.
I can only agree with the other posters here. I hope that NI look into their files and start digging deeper into the B BBC protagonists rolling about in the guts of th NI fallen and pull each and every one of he smug aresholes to account.
I’d work on that case for nothing
And 5 minutes ago on BBC-Guardian Radio 4’s ‘World at One’, who does E. Stroughton find to give his anti-Murdoch propaganda for 5 minutes, but Mr. D. Lee of ‘The Guardian’.
Even on sky News last night the presenter seemed to be getting fed up with media accusations that Murdoch ‘owns’ Sky News when of course it doesn’t, he doesn’t even have a majority share.
It’s the BBC that is the problem, the BBC kills competition, want to start a nationwide pop music station? forget it, Radio 1 already has that. Want a talk station? Nope Radio 5 have that nailed (Talksport rightly went after the BBC to test if the BBC was actually putting out the right amount of news in its remit)
Must read piece by Janet Daley, showing why she gets paid to write:-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/janetdaley/8642161/Phone-hacking-The-BBC-Left-is-using-hacking-to-get-revenge.html
It was always a treat to hear Janet Daley on BBC radio – but these days a very rare treat, she lays into the BBC too much, I suppose
Daley has it exactly right about what the Left really wants as opposed to those critical of Left-leaning media. The only thing she misses is that Fox News is a counterweight to far more than just MSNBC. CNN, the NY Times, and the Washington Post – just to name the most influential – are just as partisan and virulent as MSNBC. If these outlets hadn’t done so much damage to their own integrity over the last 15 years or so, Fox News would still be drawing minor league numbers.
Also, to describe as ‘soft left’ people who wish to shut down opposition is a misnomer. By that criteria, with its market enconomics and one party state, Chinese ‘communism’ is soft left.
No, the Gramscians who have hijacked the BBC are the subversive left.
And here is another sensible piece – by Anne Applebaum which takes a rather more realistic view of the whole thing – not something you would find in Beeboidland where crooked politicos like Thugs Campbell and Prescott continue to huff and puff, trying to blow the house down:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/just-another-british-tabloid-scandal/2011/07/09/gIQA2m5l7H_story.html
To give a flavour of the article:
“But in truth, there is nothing new about any of this in Britain. Although the technology has changed, the practices in question — paying the police for stories; the use of subterfuge to obtain personal information; the persecution of celebrities, politicians or victims of violence — are, in the British tabloid world, very old. Certainly they predate Orwell.
Until now, no one has been especially shocked by them, either. I worked for British newspapers in the early 1990s and remember very clearly the lack of surprise when transcripts of private telephone conversations between Diana, the princess of Wales, and her lover were made public, followed by transcripts of private telephone conversations between the prince of Wales and his lover. Nobody ever quite got to the bottom of the stories. Some versions said that they came from ham radio operators, who picked them up by accident. Other versions said they came from MI5, Britain’s internal security service.
Either way, they wound up in print, in tabloids that surely paid somebody for them. Either way, the recordings were illegal. But few cared at the time. The prince and princess of Wales were rich and famous, the public enjoyed watching them squirm, so why should they be allowed to have private conversations? “
Hattie Hatemen claimed on Sky this mornig that she’d never rubbed shouldders with Rebekah Brooks.
I find that hard to believe, the most powerful woman in British journalism wouldn’t be someone Harman would want to rub shoulders with?
I look forward to photos appearing of Harman with Brooks appearing soon.
Guessing the sisterhood will be putting the whole ‘this wouldn’t happen when we are in charge’ meme on the back burner for a while.
Like so many selective claims, it seems only to hold up when no one dares question it, even on logic, because they can suddenly get offended and call down a quango.
The BBC are a piece of work aren`t they?
On Feedback earlier, a surprisingly peppery Roger Bolton did ask the right questions-albeit in ever so polite terms-about the “obsession” with Murdoch in a week of rocketing energy bills, African drought, BBC reports, Eurozone collapses etc…
Her answers and stuff about “impartiality”, “Pestons fortuitous ability to get NI scoops” , “the public really DO want us to cover it”…etc are classic answers of the smug self-satisfied and patronising type that infest the BBC at the higher levels!
Like the awful Jay Hunt(silent “c” as Toksvig might say!) and Caroline Thomson; it is clear why these harpies aren`t even let onto Womans Hour. Anytime they open their mouths, the license fee uptake surely goes down in millions!