Click here to register on OneGuyFromBarlick|2|1
Go to Page
  First Page  Previous Page    11  12  13  [14]  15  16   Next Page  Last Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted -  28/04/2011  :  07:37
Political comment is a high risk activity on the site these days so I thought I'd try again to give those who are interested in politics a safe haven!


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk
Replies
Author
Go to Page
  First Page  Previous Page    11  12  13  [14]  15  16   Next Page  Last Page
 
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 11/07/2011 : 04:17
I think that the overwhelming number of kids in my era went straight from school into hard work. We never got used to the concept of not working. I reckon the biggest disservice we do for our kids these days is to have a system where there is no work for many of them at school-leaving age. Another factor is that many of them were reared in households where there was nobody working due to government policies on manufacturing industry. Remember Thatcher's Children and the high unemployment financed by North Sea Oil revenues used as a weapon against the unions? I feel sorry for them. Work was the best social club I ever joined, that's where I nade life-long friends.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 12/07/2011 : 06:01
I hope Ossie is on top of the latest exchange rates. Pound is at $1.60 and the Euro is almost at parity with the Pound. I don't know how much of this is manipulation, I suspect quite a lot of it. In the case of the US and the UK printing money to get us out of trouble must be a factor as it is in effect devaluation. Better for exports to Europe and home holidays but not a welcome trend.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 13/07/2011 : 05:35
I listened to Michael Fallon defending Cameron last night. Wonderful example of bending the facts to fit the defence. Well worth listening to. According to his version Ed Milliband had no input into calling the debate today, all down to Cameron. He says that Labour are playing 'catch-up'. Really......? He also said that Dave had given 'a full explanation' of the circumstances when checking Coulson. Funny how so many people are convinced they warned No 10 in the strongest terms against employing him. But what do we understand about these complex matters.

The foreign press are not interested in the Murdochs, they are more interested in the fact that the Italian economy is sliding into melt-down.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 14/07/2011 : 06:51
I watched the politicians congratulating themselves on the vanquishing of Newscorp. I'm afraid they may have missed the point. Read the statement Newscorp gave. They have not abandoned the bid but decided that it isn't profitable to continue it in the present climate. Newscorp is dedicated to naximising profit, their UK newspapers produce revenue but not much profit. BSkyB was an opportunity to gain access to far more profit in a sector that was growing, the newspapers are not. Therefore the long term strategy is still to get control of BSkyB, think of how much they have invested it the bid already.

Meanwhile, as the climate is not 'amenable' it makes sense to invest the war chest in buying back Newscorp shares (down 20% now), The hope is that at some time in the future if the shares recover they can be sold, the war chest replaced and the bid can go forward again. Remember that nothing has been done to bar this happening, this might possibly come later from OfCom.

One factor which hasn't been mentioned is that the dominant force in NewsCorp is Rupert Murdoch and he is 80 years old.  How long can he go on? James and Elizabeth have not proved to be the sharpest knives in the box, can they dominate the business like their father has?

What effect is the FBI investigation going to have on their global activities? Remember that the UK operation is not their main business. One thing is certain, the ongoing investigations and arrests are going to push the possible resurgence of NewsCorp in the UK further into the future. All the other factors like profitability of the papers and Rupert's survival will worsen. On the whole I reckon they are in deep trouble but the point I want to make is that this isn't because of the debate yesterday. To carry on with the bid for Sky would have been suicide, delaying it was a straight business decision.

A separate matter is Murdoch's hold on political affairs in the UK. This is over and is probably the only positive thing that we can be sure has happened as a result of yesterday's debate.

The focus has now shifted. Murdoch isn't the story. It is now the fall-out from the investgations. There are questions to be answered about politicians, the police and governance of the press. This is the story now and there could be unforseen consequences.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
frankwilk
Senior Member


3975 Posts
Posted - 14/07/2011 : 09:45
9/11/01 Hacking
  Is another distraction and an excuse for a US Senator to obtain some publicity, and possibly an opening for Lawyers in the States to get into the trough.
If anyone seriously believes that a trail exsist after 10 years they are in cuckoo land.
Plus the fact I haven't heard of any complaints from 9/11 families over the years, that they had information used that was hacked. Circus is moving across the Atlantic !!! don't think so.



Frank Wilkinson       Once Navy Always Navy Go to Top of Page
Bradders
Senior Member


1880 Posts
Posted - 14/07/2011 : 10:03


quote:
frankwilk wrote:
9/11/01 Hacking
  Is another distraction and an excuse for a US Senator to obtain some publicity, and possibly an opening for Lawyers in the States to get into the trough.
If anyone seriously believes that a trail exsist after 10 years they are in cuckoo land.
Plus the fact I haven't heard of any complaints from 9/11 families over the years, that they had information used that was hacked. Circus is moving across the Atlantic !!! don't think so.
We'll see !......

...as mentioned on "What attracted...."  , David Cameron is "damaged goods" ,  particularly if Coulson blabs.


BRADDERS BLUESINGER Go to Top of Page
Tardis
Regular Member


453 Posts
Posted - 14/07/2011 : 15:12
I thought it was a brilliant response from the Murdochs, and it was flagged on Sunday that it would occur

Took all the wind out of Ed, although you'd have thought the beeboids were still trying to thrash the story for all its worth.

I just wonder when someone will realise that some of the issues raised may well be sub judice, and in this country you should be able to have a fair trial

The Brown speech was just incredible, and just proves how easy it is to miss an open net. After all the evidence rebuttals it now just looks like a delusional paranoid rant. Poor value for money for his constituents after only 2 appearances in the commons this parliamentary year.


Go to Top of Page
frankwilk
Senior Member


3975 Posts
Posted - 14/07/2011 : 19:38
David Cameron is "damaged goods" ,  particularly if Coulson blabs.

Thought it was Coulson under investigation not Cameron ? All that can be laid at Dave's door is that he gave Coulson a second chance, nowt wrong with that. Wining and Dining  with Rebekha means nowt they all did it even Godron and Sarah had Rebekah for a sleep over at Chequers. 
We gave a bunch of MPs a second chance at the last election, after wide spread fraud. Rember how they redacted the expenses so we couldn't see what they had been doing.
Don't forget without a free press we would never have know what they had been up to.



Frank Wilkinson       Once Navy Always Navy Go to Top of Page
Bradders
Senior Member


1880 Posts
Posted - 15/07/2011 : 00:31


quote:
Tardis wrote:
I thought it was a brilliant response from the Murdochs, and it was flagged on Sunday that it would occur

Took all the wind out of Ed, although you'd have thought the beeboids were still trying to thrash the story for all its worth.

I just wonder when someone will realise that some of the issues raised may well be sub judice, and in this country you should be able to have a fair trial

The Brown speech was just incredible, and just proves how easy it is to miss an open net. After all the evidence rebuttals it now just looks like a delusional paranoid rant. Poor value for money for his constituents after only 2 appearances in the commons this parliamentary year.
I'm SO sorry to say this , but I cannot agree with a single point you make in this post.

Paragraph # 1 , I find distasteful.

Paragraph  # 2 , Doesn't make much sense...

Paragraph # 3 ,  "sub judice".....who's been charged ? 

....but more importantly .....

Paragraph # 4. I have just watched that speech given by Gordon Brown , for the second time..... . I am NOT one of his supporters, but I think your description of it  is very wide of the mark....It is neither dilusionary , paranoid, nor a rant.

I suggest you take another good look, and take in the points he makes......


BRADDERS BLUESINGER Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 15/07/2011 : 05:09
Brad. I think it's you that's missing the point. I wouldn't describe the Murdoch's handling of the debate as 'brilliant' but they certainly defused the debate. Again, on the second point I don't think any of the leaders quite realised how they had been negated by withdrawing the BSkyB bid. The select committee are getting worried about sub-judice matters, it's quite possible that if they press anybody too hard it could be used as a defence if they are subsequently arrested. As for Brown, the main part of his attack was that details of the child's illness were obtained by criminal activities, as it turns out this is completely off-beam. This is what Rupert is on about when he refers to 'lies' being used as evidence. Why do you think he changed his mind about appearing? Brown spoke for almost half an hour and most of what he said was a general attack on hacking and the press. The part that Rupert is interested in is the allegations against the Sun. Watch him on Tuesday at 14:30 and see if this is the case.

 "If anyone seriously believes that a trail exsist after 10 years they are in cuckoo land.".  Really? Our police are going back further than that in their new investigations. I think the FBI will be equally capable. A BBC report from Washigton this morning on World Service reports that the FBI have said the basis of the investigation is that it was NoW journos who did the hacking of the 9/11 victims.

Meanwhile the RAF and MOD U-turn over the Chinook pilots slides under the radar. A great shame.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
frankwilk
Senior Member


3975 Posts
Posted - 15/07/2011 : 09:39
A trail may or may not exsist, but they the FBI don't have the resources required to carry out a through investigation. Just like we didn't the first time around,  and really we don't have them this time around as well !!! Self indulgence from a bunch of crooked MPs trying to get one back at the press for showing them up.
Bradders you need to look at the clip of Godron speaking again, he came across as a Hypocrite.



Frank Wilkinson       Once Navy Always Navy Go to Top of Page
Bradders
Senior Member


1880 Posts
Posted - 15/07/2011 : 11:01
 

Gordon Brown's speech is in three parts on YouTube , Here is a link to the first.......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46zr9DH-6E8&feature=related

I don't think he came across as a hypocrite  , he mentions "my children's privacy " and "my family" once . He also mentions that matters relating to that are before the police....

I think we can accept that Murdoch's damage limitation moves are wholly cynical (and only brilliant if you support him)..

As for "sub-judice", surely that means "before a judge " and actually proceeding in court , and  is different to "prejudicial" , which is what the sub commitee will have to be very careful about .

Did I read somewhere that Either Rupert Murdoch OR his Son would  appear before the MPs ?

 
 


BRADDERS BLUESINGER Go to Top of Page
Tardis
Regular Member


453 Posts
Posted - 15/07/2011 : 11:27
Bradders:

I refer you to the retraction today printed by the Guardian. Now we just need Brown to stand up and apologise for making his spurious allegations. He was told before the child illness was printed and because of his position he could have asked for it not to be (not many in Joe Public could get that kind of denial), but theories exist that he was told that it would make him appear more "normal" to the public, in the same way that Cameron's media coverage over his son was viewed.

I agree with Stanley's interpretation. As many folk in Fleet Street say, Murdoch was the best thing that ever happened to the British Media. He is playing the long game, as all corporate moguls must do. He is no Robert Maxwell. In his interview with the WSJ Murdoch admits that he thought Brown was a "friend".

That does not mean I buy any of his products, I am not forced to support it, unlike the BBC (unless I don't watch TV at all)

The opposition wasted a whole days debate in the house, on a discussion that had already been negated. This was also their last chance before the house rose for the summer. Hence Ed's guns were spiked and silenced, and the removal of the bid was flagged on Sunday in all the media. The fact that Murdoch ran it to the wire shows the shrewdness of the operation.

Just to point out, that people are being investigated by the police with a view to prosecute criminal intent, and it is therefore important to remember that everyone is innocent until proven guilty, and some matters could indeed be viewed as sub judice if they are discussed pre-trial and lead to unneccessary influence when selecting the Jury or prosecuting the case.

On top of which, as someone on R4 last said: "I would rather have a corrupt media than a corrupt police." (I paraphrase) and all this hype is deflecting much attention away from a very public body, who should be held accountable.

I hear that Boris had a meeting with the Met boss yesterday. Oh to be a fly on that wall. Lets see if Boris "has no confidence" like he told Ian Blair


Go to Top of Page
belle
VIP Member


6502 Posts
Posted - 15/07/2011 : 12:33
I am always surprised by peoples appraisal of Gordon Brown, and realise that like America we now only want film star like poiticians who look good on camera...Blair, Cameron, Milliband, etc.. Gordon has an unfortunate air I guess and the cumulative pack instinct rejects him because he is socially awkward and perhaps because he is Scottish. However in the fullness of time I think he will be proved to be one of the most honest and intelligent politicians we have had in a very long time. Because people no longer admire integrity, or perhaps because they see agenda where there is none, they feel he must be lying, in my opinion they totally don't get him as a person and they will be proved wrong in their view of him as being like other politicians: corrupt and out for himself. I beleive he is a man with great vision who set out to make the country a better place to live, and had enough people understood him and kept him in power we would now be looking at a Govt that was forced to examine itself in terms of corrupt dealings rather than a group of Eton goons who haven't the wit to run a market stall let alone a country. They are at the mercy of every two faced civil servant who can manipulate them for their own ends..the very people who cried "Gordon's a bully" when he wouldn't let them manipulate him. I am not surprised there are still people around who are gullible enough to see a good suit and a bit of money and think "superior officer" but they would do well to remember  the appalling death tolls of the mis -managed battles that these "officers" have led them into!


Life is what you make itGo to Top of Page
Tardis
Regular Member


453 Posts
Posted - 15/07/2011 : 15:13
I hope that you are right Belle, no one person could surely be everything that the media and commentators said they were.

It was certainly unfortunate that he got himself involved with a crowd like Ed Balls, Damian McBride, Tom Watson, Kevin Maguire and to a certain extent Ed Millibland. Continually being painted as plotting, scheming, smearing, and a bunker mentality.

The reputation for phone throwing, fits of anger, bursts of expletives at underlings & newspaper folk etc are all corrorborated stories. No doubt they will not be in cabinet minutes, but they will be in the cabinet secretary's papers. Then you have all those political memoirs, even from Mandelson


Go to Top of Page
Topic is 51 Pages Long:
Go to Page
  First Page  Previous Page    11  12  13  [14]  15  16   Next Page  Last Page
 


Set us as your default homepage Bookmark us Privacy   Copyright 2004-2011 www.oneguyfrombarlick.co.uk All Rights Reserved. Design by: Frost SkyPortal.net Go To Top Of Page

Page load time - 0.594