RE: News of the World (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


FirstQuaker -> RE: News of the World (7/23/2011 2:12:44 PM)

Yes, this gets better by the day.

Apparently the Royal hacking went a lot further then thought or prosecuted, and they believe the crew hacked the Middleton family's phones too, among others in the Royal family circle of friends and associates.

The the police are going after Coulson for perjury in this case -

"It has also emerged that Mr Coulson is being investigated by police for allegedly committing perjury while working for Mr Cameron in Downing Street. It is the third criminal investigation that he faces, in addition to allegations that he knew about phone hacking while editing the paper and authorised bribes to police officers. Detectives in Strathclyde confirmed that they had opened a perjury inquiry regarding evidence Mr Coulson gave in court last year in the trial of Tommy Sheridan, the former MSP who was accused of lying in court when winning a libel action against the News of the World. Coulson was editing the paper when it ran a story accusing Sheridan of being an adulterer who visited swinging clubs." - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/phone-hacking/8656622/Kate-Middleton-and-family-may-have-been-phone-hacking-victims.html
So Coulson was lying when he testified at a trial of a man accused of lying to win a civil suit against the paper while sitting on his perch at 10 Downing?

Coulson is going to be listing his occupation as "defendant" for the next decade, because he is certainly going to be the whipping boy for a bunch of this.




Sanity -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 12:04:41 PM)


FR -

From Anncoulter.com:

quote:

MEDIA MOGUL CHARGED WITH FIRST-DEGREE MURDOCH


July 20, 2011

In December 1996, a Florida couple, John and Alice Martin, who sounded suspiciously like union goons, claimed to have inadvertently tapped into a phone conversation between then House Speaker Newt Gingrich and House Republican leadership.

According to these Democratic and union activists, they were just driving around with a police scanner in their car, picked up a random phone conversation and said to themselves, "Wait a minute! I could swear that's Dick Armey's voice!"

Luckily, they also had a tape recorder and cassette in their car, so they proceeded to illegally record the intercepted conversation and then turned the tape over to Democratic Rep. James McDermott -- the top Democrat on the Ethics Committee that was at that very moment investigating Gingrich.

Although they swore they had no idea that what they were doing was a crime, in their cover letter to McDermott, they requested immunity -- just as you probably do whenever you write somebody a letter. (They later pleaded guilty to a crime under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.)

McDermott promptly turned the tape over to The New York Times and other newspapers. The Times' headline on the story, "Gingrich Is Heard Urging Tactics in Ethics Case," might as well have been titled: "Tape Shows Gingrich Conspiring to Act Within the Law."

John Boehner, one of the participants in the Gingrich call, sued McDermott for violating his First Amendment rights, which resulted in a court ordering McDermott to pay Boehner more than $1 million.

And yet, more than a dozen news organizations, many of the same ones demanding the death penalty for Rupert Murdoch right now, filed amicus briefs defending McDermott's distribution of the pirated tape.

Full column here

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2011-07-20.html



Dont you just love those double standards




willbeurdaddy -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 12:16:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


FR -

From Anncoulter.com:

quote:

MEDIA MOGUL CHARGED WITH FIRST-DEGREE MURDOCH


July 20, 2011

In December 1996, a Florida couple, John and Alice Martin, who sounded suspiciously like union goons, claimed to have inadvertently tapped into a phone conversation between then House Speaker Newt Gingrich and House Republican leadership.

According to these Democratic and union activists, they were just driving around with a police scanner in their car, picked up a random phone conversation and said to themselves, "Wait a minute! I could swear that's Dick Armey's voice!"

Luckily, they also had a tape recorder and cassette in their car, so they proceeded to illegally record the intercepted conversation and then turned the tape over to Democratic Rep. James McDermott -- the top Democrat on the Ethics Committee that was at that very moment investigating Gingrich.

Although they swore they had no idea that what they were doing was a crime, in their cover letter to McDermott, they requested immunity -- just as you probably do whenever you write somebody a letter. (They later pleaded guilty to a crime under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.)

McDermott promptly turned the tape over to The New York Times and other newspapers. The Times' headline on the story, "Gingrich Is Heard Urging Tactics in Ethics Case," might as well have been titled: "Tape Shows Gingrich Conspiring to Act Within the Law."

John Boehner, one of the participants in the Gingrich call, sued McDermott for violating his First Amendment rights, which resulted in a court ordering McDermott to pay Boehner more than $1 million.

And yet, more than a dozen news organizations, many of the same ones demanding the death penalty for Rupert Murdoch right now, filed amicus briefs defending McDermott's distribution of the pirated tape.

Full column here

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2011-07-20.html



Dont you just love those double standards



You dont need go back that far to expose the hypocrisy of the left. Julian Assange is a cult hero for publishing hacked emails, NOTW a tool of the devil.




mnottertail -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 12:32:19 PM)

Here is the hypocracy of the right I find so endearing, notice for all his blithering and blathering to anyone who foreswears any slightly deprecation of 9/11 because of his dear friends who died in this debacle, his ideology is thicker than his watery eyes:

http://www.collarchat.com/m_3716654/mpage_8/key_wilbur/tm.htm#3718681




DomKen -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 12:43:51 PM)

So when Mr. Coulter says something not as disgusting and repugnant as usual he is suddenly not a comedian but someone to be taken seriously. I'll keep that n mind for the next time you guys try to disavow what the guy says.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 1:03:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

So when Mr. Coulter says something not as disgusting and repugnant as usual he is suddenly not a comedian but someone to be taken seriously. I'll keep that n mind for the next time you guys try to disavow what the guy says.


Mr?




DomKen -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 1:07:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

So when Mr. Coulter says something not as disgusting and repugnant as usual he is suddenly not a comedian but someone to be taken seriously. I'll keep that n mind for the next time you guys try to disavow what the guy says.


Mr?

Coulter.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 1:37:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

So when Mr. Coulter says something not as disgusting and repugnant as usual he is suddenly not a comedian but someone to be taken seriously. I'll keep that n mind for the next time you guys try to disavow what the guy says.


Mr?

Coulter.


Mr?




Sanity -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 3:07:59 PM)


A leftist without an ad hominem is lost as for the most part they have no substantive arguments.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 3:10:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


A leftist without an ad hominem is lost as for the most part they have no substantive arguments.



Im trying to figure out whether thats what it was, or its a drug problem.




Lucylastic -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 3:20:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


A leftist without an ad hominem is lost as for the most part they have no substantive arguments.




You mean like this one?
http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=3788983




mnottertail -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 3:21:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


A leftist without an ad hominem is lost as for the most part they have no substantive arguments.



Im trying to figure out whether thats what it was, or its a drug problem.


I don't know what's wrong with you two 9/11 deniers, if it is lead paint ingestion in your infancy or if it is a flashback from rushfelching for one and a flashback from cretinism for another.




DomKen -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 3:35:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

So when Mr. Coulter says something not as disgusting and repugnant as usual he is suddenly not a comedian but someone to be taken seriously. I'll keep that n mind for the next time you guys try to disavow what the guy says.


Mr?

Coulter.


Mr?

You'd prefer I not refer to Mr. Coulter politely?




willbeurdaddy -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 3:49:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

So when Mr. Coulter says something not as disgusting and repugnant as usual he is suddenly not a comedian but someone to be taken seriously. I'll keep that n mind for the next time you guys try to disavow what the guy says.


Mr?

Coulter.


Mr?

You'd prefer I not refer to Mr. Coulter politely?


Trust me, you wouldnt like my preferences




Sanity -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 3:58:29 PM)

You are confused

I didnt write that others are incapable of making ad hominems

I wrote that a leftist without an ad hominem is lost as for the most part they have no substantive arguments.

Understand?

In other words, thats all that many of you are capable of

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

You mean like this one?
http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=3788983




mnottertail -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 4:07:25 PM)

there is no argument substantive or not,  to counter an untenable, untrue soliloquy by the right.

I mean, you point out the reams and reams of actual fact that disproves every bit of the rampant fantasy in the obloquy they vomit, every time in every hysterical post....and then you do it again and again at least over a course of 12 years, and it is like talking to a briquette of extremely porous lava with less cogence and cognizance abilities and what needs saying after that?






Lucylastic -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 4:11:42 PM)

Im not confused in the slightest, im laughing at you trying to wriggle away questions you dont want to answer, or rather cant, all the while once again attempting to insult my mental abilities.
now would you like to try again?? as a grownup now....please
[image]http://www.lucylasticslair.com/teehee.jpg[/image]






Sanity -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 8:01:21 PM)


Ironic dont you think, that your post is an ad hominem

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Im not confused in the slightest, im laughing at you trying to wriggle away questions you dont want to answer, or rather cant, all the while once again attempting to insult my mental abilities.
now would you like to try again?? as a grownup now....please
[image]http://www.lucylasticslair.com/teehee.jpg[/image]







Owner59 -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 9:13:26 PM)

Not when it`s true.




tweakabelle -> RE: News of the World (7/29/2011 9:22:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

Not when it`s true.

That works for most people Owner 59. Unfortunately, our resident wing nuts are either unable or unwilling to recognise a defence of truth.

Their posts repeatedly show us that truth is very much an occasional visitor that part of the political spectrum. And not a particularly welcome one at that.

One explanation is that it's too much of a challenge to their world view.




Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875