Murdoch Empire Unraveling! About time!

1. 65

   Ralph Deedsposted 12 years ago

   Rebekah Brooks, Murdoch's head person in UK arrested in hacking scandal.
   
   http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/18/world … ng.html?hp
   
   Top Murdoch aides resign--Rebekah Brooks and Lee Hinton, WSJ Publisher.
   
   http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/16/world … amp;st=cse

   replyreport
   1. 68

      bgamallposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Most people have no clue how evil Rupert Murdoch is. I guarantee you that he knew about 911 beforehand. Watch this video Ralph. This was not the collapse of a building by fire: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivUQMHfxeGM
      Here is a dutch detonation expert who rightly says WTC7 was detonated Ralph: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NL91DdZyVPg The BBC reported the WTC7 building collapsing before it collapsed. Watch this carefully. Watch the explosions, predicted the explosions that clearly were heard in this video. Watch the entire video Ralph. This is proof WTC7 was blown up.

      replyreport
      1. 65

         Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         It does look suspicious. I wonder what the official explanation is?
         
         Here's some conversation about Building 7 on Snopes--
         
         http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=32627
         
         More from Snopes:
         
             quote:Originally posted by FourKidneys *packed in ice*:
             One of them (can't remember which one) is called "Why The Towers Fell," and explains the effects on the structural integrity of the buildings using the original plans to illustrate points. Four Kitties
         
         This program has been run on the Discovery Channel several times recently. It's an excellent reconstruction of the disaster. There was a large amount of 'mechanical damage' caused by the impact of the plane and then a large amount of 'fire damage' caused by the tons and tons of burning jet fuel. The heat made the floor trusses sag (their fire retarding coating having been stripped off by the impact) and the retaining bolts snapped. Once the first floor let go and dropped, they all 'pancaked' to the ground.
         
         If you do a search on this site Firefighter Fatality Reports you will see that truss construction collapses are a common problem encountered by firefighters. They usually occur in wood construction but also occur with steel trusses. A typical McDonalds or Burger King restaurant roof will collapse within 8 to 10 minutes after a fire starts, if the fire gets above the sprinkler heads.
         
         As far as WTC-7 collapsing, the building contents burned for approximately 7 hours before the building finally gave way. No building in the world is designed to withstand 7 hours of fire!! The reason for the collapse was the same - excessive heat caused truss sagging. The reason for the heat was the fire that FDNY could not suppress; because hundreds of their members inclduing the entire command team were killed and because the water mains were crushed when the Towers fell. The limited water available was pumped from the harbor by the fireboats and amounted to little more than pissing on a bonfire.
         
         Since you're dealing with the lunatic fringe here, none of this will make any difference, just thought you should know.
         
         Shamrock

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Moderndayslaveposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            The sad thing is and I said it to a co-worker on Friday about something else."What does the BS er do when they try to BS someone that actually knows what they are talking about"? Trying to compare the towers to a Mcdonalds is like comparing a Hummer and a Yugo. PS there's nothing above the truss but the next floor and the sprinklers hang from the truss. Steel Framed building fires that did not collapse.
            http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysi … fires.html

            replyreport
            1. 65

               Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               "As far as WTC-7 collapsing, the building contents burned for approximately 7 hours before the building finally gave way. No building in the world is designed to withstand 7 hours of fire!!"
               
               I have no expertise in such matters, but I'm disinclined to believe the conspiracy theories. What possible motive could there have been for the NY Fire Dept to detonate building 7, let alone the other two.

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  Moderndayslaveposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Ralph,I have read about this stuff probably for too long.911 truth.org would be a good start. 7 did not burn that bad for that long
                  WTC7 housed;
                  http://www.wtc7.net/background.html  It seems a lot of the information was lost for the SEC investigations of that time.  I guess I just don't believe the official story,

                  replyreport
      2. 59

         carol3sanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Well I say it is about time he is knocked down from his high horse.  It is mind boggling that any one person can exort such a large control over the media,  and over the government, and in trying to shape the opinion of ordernary citizens.

         replyreport
   2. 62

      S Leretsehposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      America's HERO, Fox News creator Mr.   Murdoch, the only person who dared to take on NBC, ABC and CBS and their despicable anti America crusade, is not suffering ONE  bit. C’mon Deeds!  Britain ( News Corporation ) probably represents about 10% of Murdoch's vast media empire - should he decide to sell out there.   America is the BIG ticket. And Murdoch is on VERY safe ground here.

      replyreport
2. 65

   Ralph Deedsposted 12 years ago

   Former News International executive—and Rupert Murdoch protégé —Rebekah Brooks was arrested Sunday morning for her role in the phone-hacking scandal. The media mogul has been back from the brink before, having saved his company 20 years ago. But, as Joanne Lipman points out, he was a lot younger then.
   
   http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 … REB8cX6Xcz

   replyreport
3. 60

   knolyourselfposted 12 years ago

   Personally think Murdock took over America by phone-hacking blackmail.

   replyreport
4. 60

   Jonathan Jancoposted 12 years ago

   I think this court ruling says it all. Pay close att'n to the date.
   
   http://ceasespin.org/ceasespin_blog/cea … ublic.html

   replyreport
5. 61

   Evan G Rogersposted 12 years ago

   I was curious why this was such big news - I thought that the government approved of spying on fellow citizens!
   
   They do it all the time: The Patriot Act.
   
   And they encourage us to do it: http://www.google.com/search?q=obama+en … =firefox-a
   
   so...
   
   I thought that spying on people to gain information was completely accepted by government.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Doug Hughesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      It can be done by the government operating under a court order.  You are not a court fool Evan. Don't make a fools argument.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Wesman Todd Shawposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Before the "patriot act" the U.S. Government merely paid the Brits to spy on us - circumventing all laws.

         replyreport
6. 58

   kateperezposted 12 years ago

   I like how you said that in regards to the media.
   
   No media outlet should ever have the capacity to shape opinions of ordinary citizens.  We should be fed actual, undeniable facts and create our own opinions based on the truth, not someone's perspective of the truth.

   replyreport
7. 82

   CMHypnoposted 12 years ago

   It's not just the media unravelling over here, the head of the Metropolitan Police (London police) has had to resign as well
   
   http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … quits.html

   replyreport
8. 68

   Charles Jamesposted 12 years ago

   Seeing all these people resign one after another is beginning to look like Watergate. It is getting closer to Murdoch himself every day.
   
   It could not happen to a more deserving person.

   replyreport
9. 65

   Ralph Deedsposted 12 years ago

   Murdoch wasn't very impressive in his testimony before Parliament today.

   replyreport
10. 76

    lovemychrisposted 12 years ago

    Playing the old "I don't remember" routine.
    Gonzales said it like 57 times in his testimony about 9/11.
    
    Which I find very telling, btw.....they are accused of tapping the phones of 9/11 and 7/7 victims...
    
    Anyway--to me, this is Kosher Nostra...Murdoch is an ultra nationalist zionist, and using the same "I'm old and senile" defense that Uncle Junior used in the Sopranos!!
    
    Buying police, Scotland Yard, buying the silence of people....Mafia tactics.

    replyreport
11. 76

    lovemychrisposted 12 years ago

    Roger Ailes: “I defend the United States, Israel and the Constitution. That’s when I get my death threats,” he said.

    replyreport
12. 76

    lovemychrisposted 12 years ago

    The Sept 20, 2010 issue of The New Yorker  had a profile of David and Charles Koch, "The billionaire brothers who are waging a war against Obama." 
    
    "A recent segment of Koch Brothers Exposed examined the intricate right-wing echo chamber the brothers fund in order to propagate policy lies into the mainstream debate. Unsurprisingly, Fox News was a key outlet through which they could accomplish this."
    
    ****
    It's all connected.

    replyreport
13. 65

    Ralph Deedsposted 12 years ago

    "I love the smell of Murdoch in the morning!"
    
    9:50 a.m. - Rupert thumps the table a few times, describes this as "the most humble day of my life," and proceeds to deny any knowledge of the details behind this scandal. Some protesters pop up in the room and are removed, and the questioners are struggling to get answers from Rupert, as James keeps jumping in to take the bullet.
    
    10:04 a.m. - "We felt ashamed at what had happened," says Rupert, in response to a question about why News of the World was closed down. When asked about other forms of surveillance - computer hacking specifically - he pleads ignorance.
    
    10:10 a.m. - Sonny-boy jumps in again to blame the whole scandal on "the acts of a few reporters." He is lathering himself and his father with seeming regret, and says the bid to buy BSkyB was dumped deliberately to maintain the level of integrity News Corp. aspires to. "What happened at News of the World was wrong," he says, "and we have apologized profusely." He swears up and down that News Corp. is cooperating fully with the police investigation.
    
    10:13 a.m. - "Are you responsible for this?" Rupert is asked. "No," he replies. "Did you know about the payoffs?" Rupert is asked. "I don't know anything about that," he replies. Of course.
    
    http://www.truth-out.org/i-love-smell-m … 1311096613

    replyreport
14. 76

    lovemychrisposted 12 years ago

    "I did not have sex with that woman!"

    replyreport
15. 76

    lovemychrisposted 12 years ago

    "While the world is watching Murdoch, the Israeli's have declared open season on Gaza with Drones and F16's.
    
    Lets not take our eye off the ball here, things are about to get serious for a lot of people who cannot defend themselves or their families."

    replyreport
    1. 65

       Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Guess where they got the "drones and F-16s." And who paid for them.

       replyreport
16. 68

    Charles Jamesposted 12 years ago

    It seems that James Murdoch may have lied to the House of Commons. He said he had never seen an email about the large damages figure and associated legal costs paid to a hacking victim. Now two of his underlings say they showed it to him!
    
    Seperately, News International have been paying the legal costs of the private investigator who was doing all the hacking. The obvious question is "Why?" - obviously to keep him sweet. Now they have stopped paying his legal costs so he is likely to be hurting for money soon. Will he do a deal with the police to be a prosecution witness? Or sell his story to a foreighn newspaper (The UK press cannot pay criminals for their stories).
    
    Watch this space!

    replyreport
    1. 65

       Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       I didn't find James Murdoch's testimony convincing. A little too slick.

       replyreport
17. 65

    Ralph Deedsposted 12 years ago

    "LONDON —Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain said on Friday that James Murdoch still had “questions to answer” about the phone hacking scandal swirling around News International, the British arm of his father Rupert Murdoch’s media empire, a day after Mr. Murdoch’s testimony on the matter was called into question by two former News International executives.
    Multimedia
    
    "Tom Watson, a Labor lawmaker who has taken a leading role in the hacking inquiries, said he was asking the police to investigate whether Mr. Murdoch had misled a parliamentary committee in his testimony on Tuesday...."
    
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/23/world … ch.html?hp

    replyreport
18. 60

    knolyourselfposted 12 years ago

    I like this line: "The fear that those who crossed him (Murdock) would be given the full tabloid treatment over their personal misdemeanours, real or imagined, has proved to be a powerful Mafia-like racket.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Doug Hughesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Here's the old Proverb right, When false Theeves fall out, true men come to their own.
       
       [a 1640 Day & Chettle Blind Beggar (1659) IV.]
       
       I forgot I need to connect the dots for the wingnuts. In the days Murdoch was feared,  an employee would fall on his sword knowing failure to do that would be punished, and protecting the king would be rewarded. Now the king is dethroned, the threat of punishment by Murdoch is less threatening than a lengthy prison term...
       
       In these circumstances, thieves fall out...

       replyreport
19. 60

    knolyourselfposted 12 years ago

    "Gore was almost certainly unaware of it at the time, but a Bush relative assisted by Roger Ailes and Fox had emerged as would be election decider regarding presidential projections."

    replyreport