Rupert the Bear & His friends...

[Mickymoody]

I never done it, I know nothing of it, it was 1% of what I own, I never talk to them, never have done.

But always appear in public, hand in hand, with the current PM in favour. But enter by the back door.

It's like a kangaroo court in reverse; Murdock has so much power, that he could point to an individual member, and say 'YOU DID THIS', but the member could retort, but how do you know? Did you hack me? And he did. possibly.

What a farce! I suggest that someone setup a website to lobby this enquiry, and force Mr Vampyre Murdock, from their previous 40% of readership on the UK, and their ownership to charge owners of Sky TV excessive charges, for really bad service? Locked channels, and excessive subsription? And the ban of BSB, for the ownership of SKY, when BSB was a superior service provider with better signals...like the Betamax vs VHS, VHS won, but betamax was technically superiour. So Billionaires are preventing the public from receiving the best quality services, for money.

 

[Alarm]

WTF.

 

[LooPrEvil]

WTF.

Absolutely !!!!

 

[Space cat]

like the Betamax vs VHS, VHS won, but betamax was technically superiour

That's true - and VHS machines cost more too - but there was no conspiracy. Sony shot themselves in the foot when they tried to keep the whole thing to themselves. VHS was licensed out to all and sundry. Then they shot themselves in the other foot by failing to spot the demand for pre-recorded video and this sealed their fate. Nice try Sony but no cigar.

PS: Don't quote me on this but I heard that BSB were also trying to be too clever by half. Each receiver was uniquely identifiable to them. Don't ask me how and it might not be true anyway but, if it was, it would've put me off.

 

[Mickymoody]

Now the sacked execs are coming out saying that James is lying. Which was clearly evident, but the questioners, and the answerers are so corrupt, that it will all end in a fizzle...and nobody will be brought to account, as the Government were complicit throughout, and must have known what was going on.

I said before that a key witness would be found dead, before he died, and probably the boss, would fall of a boat, after the last media scandal/pension fraud...so wouldn't it be convenient when Rupert suddenly takes ill, and is unable to answer further questions?

Rupert, chose his words carefully, and illiterated too much to make his point, which means he he was lying. his son, the Bear, came across as an idiot, and did the famous case in America Oliver Stone, who stated throughout the trial stated "I have no recollection of the event Sir", "I plead the 5th"...

Rebekah (were her parents dyslexic or Jewish?); seemed pretty stupid under question, as her job is a journo. She repeatedly stated sorry, repeat that? Isn't the first instinct of a journalist to listen and understand, and retain the information?

Corruption, lies, scandals, people brought to book....it's like something that you would read in "The News of the World"....oh. They dunnit.

I like the comments from Alarm and LooPrEvil, to claim that they have no idea whats talked about? When the story has not been off the telly for two weeks...or do you work for the Rupert Murdock empire, and suppress information, and claim there isn't an issue? Or do you live in a cave? Surely you heard of Rupert (the bear), his son in thread title referred to as the bear...

 

[alumni]

And so states the forum sage!

Corrupt Government? Which one are you alluding to? present or past?

Chose his words carefully - of course he did! That's what any sensible person would do. You might want to take heed of such practice. And since when did choosing your words carefully confirm guilt?

Asking the questioner to repeat the question is standard practice - when the questioner is asking silly numpty questions.

So yeah, WTF are you on about!

 

[Mickymoody]

And so states the forum sage!

Corrupt Government? Which one are you alluding to? present or past?

Chose his words carefully - of course he did! That's what any sensible person would do. You might want to take heed of such practice. And since when did choosing your words carefully confirm guilt?

Asking the questioner to repeat the question is standard practice - when the questioner is asking silly numpty questions.

So yeah, WTF are you on about!

The present are totally corrupt, but the last less so, if history is correct..so why say WTF? Have you no access to news?

 

[alumni]

And so states the forum sage!

Corrupt Government? Which one are you alluding to? present or past?

Chose his words carefully - of course he did! That's what any sensible person would do. You might want to take heed of such practice. And since when did choosing your words carefully confirm guilt?

Asking the questioner to repeat the question is standard practice - when the questioner is asking silly numpty questions.

So yeah, WTF are you on about!

The present are totally corrupt, but the last less so, if history is correct..so why say WTF? Have you no access to news?

The last lot less so?
Seems it's you who is lacking access to the news!
Who was in power when all this was going on?
Who was in power when the MP expenses scandal was raised?

Like i said. Try take a leaf out of Ruperts book with regard to your comments.

 

[Mickymoody]

And so states the forum sage!

Corrupt Government? Which one are you alluding to? present or past?

Chose his words carefully - of course he did! That's what any sensible person would do. You might want to take heed of such practice. And since when did choosing your words carefully confirm guilt?

Asking the questioner to repeat the question is standard practice - when the questioner is asking silly numpty questions.

So yeah, WTF are you on about!

The present are totally corrupt, but the last less so, if history is correct..so why say WTF? Have you no access to news?

The last lot less so?
Seems it's you who is lacking access to the news!
Who was in power when all this was going on?
Who was in power when the MP expenses scandal was raised?

Like i said. Try take a leaf out of Ruperts book with regard to your comments.

A leaf out of Ruperts book, or paper, seems to be lies, then when questioned, more lies...so what are you implying?

 

[Alarm]

Soz, not sleeping right again.

To the point, WTF still.

They all lie, you get on the bandwagon 14 months late as per !

 

[alumni]

A leaf out of Ruperts book, or paper, seems to be lies, then when questioned, more lies...so what are you implying?

As usual, you change tac.
To keep it really simple for you, thinking about his response and carefully chosen words. Something you should adopt!

Based on your comments, the guy is damned if he answers and damned if he doesn't. On what evidence are you basing your comments?

Remember, Rupert and son were not obliged to answer to the committees. Personally, i'm surprised he didn't tell them to go fck themselves. Hardly paragons of virtue themselves are they?

 

[Mickymoody]

A leaf out of Ruperts book, or paper, seems to be lies, then when questioned, more lies...so what are you implying?

As usual, you change tac.
To keep it really simple for you, thinking about his response and carefully chosen words. Something you should adopt!

Based on your comments, the guy is damned if he answers and damned if he doesn't. On what evidence are you basing your comments?

Remember, Rupert and son were not obliged to answer to the committees. Personally, i'm surprised he didn't tell them to go fck themselves. Hardly paragons of virtue themselves are they?

I haven't changed tact, I only see what the lying devious pair do, as does everyone else, I have no access to phone records, which those two did, of many of the MP's questioning them, and now people are stepping up to the plate to discredit the pair, as would be expected, possibly to save their own skin, in the inevitable trial. It's Oliver Northgate all over again...say nothing and be damned..'I have no recollection of that event Sir, next question'...

My evidence is based on what has been reported. The same evidence that everyone else has access to. For too long has media had a grip on politics, and can be 'Kingmakers', to influence elections, as they have.

He really is damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't..because when he lies, there is always someone there in the shadows, to stab him in the back, after he sacked all his staff. And he is very used to lying.

I just tell it as I see it.

 

[Mickymoody]

Just seen a vacancy advertised.
Hanging judge required.

Quals required, the ability to see beliefs, dogma and complete b0110x to be fact.

Do you watch TV? Or are you living in the 1800's?

Do you really believe these people are telling the truth? And you can't even spell...

What are you seeing? You make no sense, and add nothing...

 

[alumni]

Just seen a vacancy advertised.
Hanging judge required.

Quals required, the ability to see beliefs, dogma and complete b0110x to be fact.

Do you watch TV? Or are you living in the 1800's?

Do you really believe these people are telling the truth? And you can't even spell...

What are you seeing? You make no sense, and add nothing...

Look numbnuts.
You are the one making statements of fact, not me. Your beliefs and dogma are just that. It does not mean they are fact.

With all the contradictions being thrown about it would seem someone is lying,question is, who? - but you alone have seemingly nailed it down.

So lets have a look at your reasoning shall we.
You say the current Government are corrupt, the last lot less so.
So come on then, present the evidence to substantiate this claim.

To help you, and God knows you need it, remember that ALL this went on whilst the 'last lot' were in charge. A bit rich of them to now try and take the moral high ground.
MPs expenses fiddles - yep, last lot in charge
Tony Blair, Gordon Brown lies and deceit on both the Middle East and economy - self explanatory.

Regarding my spelling, i see we're back to your usual cop out.
I'm still waiting for your explanation on how i previously spelt paranoia wrong. Afterall, if anybody should know about that word.

 

[cumbriahandyman]

Just seen a vacancy advertised.
Hanging judge required.

Quals required, the ability to see beliefs, dogma and complete b0110x to be fact.

Do you watch TV? Or are you living in the 1800's?

Do you really believe these people are telling the truth? And you can't even spell...

What are you seeing? You make no sense, and add nothing...

Look numbnuts.
You are the one making statements of fact, not me. Your beliefs and dogma are just that. It does not mean they are fact.

With all the contradictions being thrown about it would seem someone is lying,question is, who? - but you alone have seemingly nailed it down.

So lets have a look at your reasoning shall we.
You say the current Government are corrupt, the last lot less so.
So come on then, present the evidence to substantiate this claim.

To help you, and God knows you need it, remember that ALL this went on whilst the 'last lot' were in charge. A bit rich of them to now try and take the moral high ground.
MPs expenses fiddles - yep, last lot in charge
Tony Blair, Gordon Brown lies and deceit on both the Middle East and economy - self explanatory.

Regarding my spelling, i see we're back to your usual cop out.
I'm still waiting for your explanation on how i previously spelt paranoia wrong. Afterall, if anybody should know about that word.

How very brave of you...