Skip to main content

Gotcha!

I believe Rebekah Brooks presided over a conspiracy to corrupt British politicians and undermine our democracy. That is not what she is being charged with. She has been charged simply with attempting to pervert the course of justice. She has only been charged essentially with the destruction of evidence. In my view she is probably guilty, but these are the lesser charges in any event.


It seems to me that Brooks was a primary figure in Rupert Murdoch's blackmail and bribery of the British political class. She also, I believe, orchestrated the bribery and corruption of the Police and various other significant parts of the British establishment. She represented an organisation that is a malign and criminal influence.


The Tories - as the party in government- are getting more abuse than Labour. Yet it was- in my view- Labour that was even more corrupted by the Murdoch money and the Murdoch blackmail. The testimony of James Murdoch- attempting to destroy as many current ministers as he could, indicates that even the Murdoch family fear that the game is up for them. However, Tony Blair and Mandelson should also be criticised even more severely, in my view.


I certainly hope that blame is placed fairly and evenly.


Only the Liberal Democrats are untainted by the "seeming" criminal activity of the Murdoch organisation. It still seems that Jeremy Hunt- what a fool- walked into the trap, even after it was clear that Vince Cable was 100% in the right. The smear of the Lib Dems by the Murdoch media was accelerated after it was clear that Cable would not be bought: and the fingerprints of shafting Cable, were- of course- with the Telegraph and the BBC, not Murdoch.


The sinister criminality of News International that has been revealed in recent weeks must surely have consequences: I hope that the charges against "the flame haired temptress" will eventually embrace her bosses: both son and father. It is firmly in the interests- I believe- of British democracy that they should both face trial. 


If guilty, they should never be released.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...