The Leveson Inquiry

by Blamhappy Thu May 31, 2012 10:01 am

First topic message reminder :

I know it's a it late, but I'm starting the thread because Jeremy Hunt gives evidence from 10 this morning and this could be explosive.

Someone I follow on Twitter believes that Hunt might resign soon after giving evidence. How will this affect the evidence he gives (will he be braver?)? How will all this impact on David Cameron? What will be the general knock-on effect?

I think we could also discuss other aspects of the "hacking scandal" in general here too. Let's include discussion on Andy Coulson, who was charged last night with Perjury in relation to his court case in 2010.

It's quite exciting if you're sad like me Smile

by skwalker1964 Fri Jun 01, 2012 8:51 am

The neck of these Tories never fails to amaze me. In clear contradiction of all the evidence they're running a PR campaign now to make Hunt whiter than white.

There's no question he went over the line in dealing with the BSkyb issue - but absolutely no doubt whatever that he misled Parliament on more than one occasion. And that alone is enough to mean he has to resign or be sacked.

by Mel Fri Jun 01, 2012 8:51 am

Hello chip.
I agree with you on that point, although IMO both threads lend to scandal one way or another. The vibes coming out of the Leveson enquiry tend to suit both threads as they both tend to highlight scandal.
Difficult one chick.

by Mel Fri Jun 01, 2012 8:53 am

Harman said Labour would call a vote in the House of Commons on whether Mr Hunt's actions should be referred to the independent investigator on the ministerial code.

What chance of that happening???

by sickchip Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:04 am

skwalker

skwalker1964 wrote: - but absolutely no doubt whatever that he misled Parliament on more than one occasion.

Are you suggesting he's a duplicitous Hunt?

by Adele Carlyon Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:06 am

haha! He sure is!!

by anfieldspirit Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:49 am

morning all

@Mel - thks for the welcome!!

I think that Hunt will now get away with it, despite being guilty as hell - Cameron took a gamble on him and it looks to have paid off. The inquiry report is now the final hope, although the motion being proposed by Labour may bring a surprise result. Interested by the inconsistency in govt - Warsi refers herself for scrutiny, regarding a few £000s but the £8BN Hunt was playing about with, seems to have no bearing. This is a corrupt, cynical, patronising govt, without morals, or compassion. Most crucially, it has no actual mandate from the people of these great isles - but is set on the destruction of the very fabric of the country. I dread to think what things will be like following another 3 years of this shower of s***..........

by trevorw2539 Fri Jun 01, 2012 10:43 am

I am a Liverpool supporter, therefore I am biased in favour of that team. I am not so biased that I cannot admit that there are better teams in the Premier League at the moment.
There comes a time when we all should be able to put aside our biased views and await the outcome of various matters that concern us.
I am not talking politics now.
There are people I know that can put aside personal feelings and consider other points of view. Others who have difficulty doing that. Who do I trust the most for a clear decision on a difficult matter.
Politics. Whatever your thoughts on Hunt and the Leveson Inquiry you will have been biased in one way or the other by your own feelings, and that is natural.
What we need to ask ourselves is whether DC thought that Hunt would be able to put aside his bias, where Cable would not. Knowing neither I don't know whether he was right or wrong. He most certainly could have looked elsewhere, though I suspect from what I have read extraneously many other MP's have biased views too.
I have no love for this Government, and would like its demise.
But I have learned that in certain matters we have to await judgement.
Unfortunately many 'killers' have been hung, only to find in the end the evidence was faulty/misinterpreted.

Bring in a Theocracy. We can at least believe its policies....erm...perhaps not. Smile

by oftenwrong Fri Jun 01, 2012 10:56 am

Bring in a Theocracy.

A Military Government might make a few interesting changes.

by **Ivan** Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:58 am

sickchip wrote:
We appear to have two threads discussing this now! My dilemma - where to post? Having just made a point on the 'tory scandal' thread, I'm tempted to repeat it here??

Please don’t! Posting exactly the same message on more than one thread is against our rules, which can be found on the welcome board:-
https://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk/t18-posting-rules

Hopefully you will understand why I have what to some is an annoying habit of merging similar threads. If I hadn’t done so over the past eight months, there would now be at least 150 more threads on this forum, all helping to dilute discussions and making the forum more complicated and less user friendly.

However, Blamhappy was quite right to start a specific thread on the Leveson Inquiry, someone should have done it sooner. The other more general thread was started by me after Gove issued parliamentary passes in dubious circumstances, and it’s suitable for discussing any of the multitude of Tory scandals and examples of sleaze that characterise this corrupt and incompetent government.

by trevorw2539 Fri Jun 01, 2012 12:45 pm

oftenwrong wrote:Bring in a Theocracy.

A Military Government might make a few interesting changes.

Only if I can drive a tank Basketball

by jackthelad Fri Jun 01, 2012 2:41 pm

trevorw2539 wrote:
oftenwrong wrote:Bring in a Theocracy.

A Military Government might make a few interesting changes.

Only if I can drive a tank

If you can drive a car Trevor you can drive a tank, two feet are required though, a pedal for each track.
Hunt is innocent, who says so, Cameron says so, no inquiery of his dealing with the Murdock affair needed, all was above board, you only get the true and honest opinions from the Tories. I am writing that with tongue in cheek.

by Blamhappy Fri Jun 01, 2012 4:40 pm

anfieldspirit wrote:The key question posed by Jay QC was around the issue of bias, in that Cable was removed due to bias against - and yet Hunt was appointed despite clear bias for. Which was either crass stupidity/incompetence by Cameron, or a cynical move to ensure smooth passage for the Murdoch bid (not expecting the whole issue to be scrutinised at a future point!!). The emails/txts/meetings that Hunt was involved in are indefensible, as is his treatment of his SPAD. I believe he showed (some) remorse for the way Adam Smith was treated - but if he was an honourable person, he would have stepped down weeks ago. His testimony was riddled with inconsistency and fudge (I agree with Phil Hornby's assessment above) and I wish I could have gotten a £1 every time he mention 'superfast broadband'!! Sorry folks, he has to go, and if there were any justice or propriety in this farce - closely followed by the gurning lightweight Cameron.........and breathe!!

I agree with you, anfield.

Welcome to the forum Smile

by Blamhappy Fri Jun 01, 2012 4:43 pm

Ivan wrote:
However, Blamhappy was quite right to start a specific thread on the Leveson Inquiry, someone should have done it sooner. The other more general thread was started by me after Gove issued parliamentary passes in dubious circumstances, and it’s suitable for discussing any of the multitude of Tory scandals and examples of sleaze that characterise this corrupt and incompetent government.

Hi sickchip.

Yeah, stick to this thread now. I did start it late, in all fairness. I decided that the appearance of Hunt at the inquiry justified a new thread. I know this means that discussion is now on both threads, but this is the one to post in from now on. Sorry for the confusion.

by Blamhappy Fri Jun 01, 2012 4:47 pm

trevorw2539 wrote:
There comes a time when we all should be able to put aside our biased views and await the outcome of various matters that concern us.
I am not talking politics now.

Unfortunately many 'killers' have been hung, only to find in the end the evidence was faulty/misinterpreted.

Bring in a Theocracy. We can at least believe its policies....erm...perhaps not.

I know where you're coming from, and I definitely agree with giving people a fair hearing, but there'd almost be no point in a discussion forum if we couldn't present our views on important matters.

Do you feel that it would be better not to discuss something like this inquiry at all, or do you merely mean that we shouldn't give our verdicts at this point? I don't feel that either is a problem myself, but your keenness for fairness is a lovely trait.

by trevorw2539 Fri Jun 01, 2012 5:35 pm

Blamhappy wrote:
trevorw2539 wrote:
There comes a time when we all should be able to put aside our biased views and await the outcome of various matters that concern us.
I am not talking politics now.

Unfortunately many 'killers' have been hung, only to find in the end the evidence was faulty/misinterpreted.

Bring in a Theocracy. We can at least believe its policies....erm...perhaps not.

I know where you're coming from, and I definitely agree with giving people a fair hearing, but there'd almost be no point in a discussion forum if we couldn't present our views on important matters.

Do you feel that it would be better not to discuss something like this inquiry at all, or do you merely mean that we shouldn't give our verdicts at this point? I don't feel that either is a problem myself, but your keenness for fairness is a lovely trait.

I have no problem with anyone putting their point of view forward. Not only does it stimulate discussion it shows others points that they have not thought of themselves. The thing to remember is that this is not a trial, there is no Jury present. You, and others on here, watch the Inquiry and see things about the witnesses attitudes and their mannerisms. This will mean different things to different people. This has been evident in the posts. Most of the public will have to make up their minds on what they read, or hear on the TV. Each different paper will have different 'attitudes' for its readers to absorb.
For those who have made their minds up, good for them. I would like to think the best of him, but all I know is what I hear and see. I will have to decide one day when the 'evidence' is in.

A couple of years ago I gave a little help to someone who had just come out of prison. The word got around that he had been in prison for paedophilia. He received a rough time at the hands of some of the locals. I happen to know that he wasn't that way inclined and people had things wrong. Eventually things became clearer and calmed down, but no thanks to people making up their minds prematurely.
I'm only saying this so you understand my caution.

by Blamhappy Fri Jun 01, 2012 5:41 pm

Yep, I know what you mean.

by sickchip Fri Jun 01, 2012 5:47 pm

Ivan wrote:
sickchip wrote:
We appear to have two threads discussing this now! My dilemma - where to post? Having just made a point on the 'tory scandal' thread, I'm tempted to repeat it here??

However, Blamhappy was quite right to start a specific thread on the Leveson Inquiry, someone should have done it sooner.

Ivan,

Strange that when I was the first to suggest a seperate thread on Leveson, I was told there wasn't much point! And now suddenly it's quite right!

Why don't you merge the 'Leveson' related posts from the 'tory scandal' thread with this thread?

by **Ivan** Fri Jun 01, 2012 6:35 pm

Why don't you merge the 'Leveson' related posts from the 'tory scandal' thread with this thread?

Thanks, sickchip, I need some more work!! Yes, I will do that later tonight.
Smile

by sickchip Fri Jun 01, 2012 7:25 pm

Ivan,

Sorry Embarassed

...........it's really ok, if it is too much work.

by Mel Fri Jun 01, 2012 7:36 pm

Come on Ivan, we know you are twiddling your thumbs Very Happy

by Redflag Sat Jun 02, 2012 8:59 am

anfieldspirit wrote:The key question posed by Jay QC was around the issue of bias, in that Cable was removed due to bias against - and yet Hunt was appointed despite clear bias for. Which was either crass stupidity/incompetence by Cameron, or a cynical move to ensure smooth passage for the Murdoch bid (not expecting the whole issue to be scrutinised at a future point!!). The emails/txts/meetings that Hunt was involved in are indefensible, as is his treatment of his SPAD. I believe he showed (some) remorse for the way Adam Smith was treated - but if he was an honourable person, he would have stepped down weeks ago. His testimony was riddled with inconsistency and fudge (I agree with Phil Hornby's assessment above) and I wish I could have gotten a £1 every time he mention 'superfast broadband'!! Sorry folks, he has to go, and if there were any justice or propriety in this farce - closely followed by the gurning lightweight Cameron.........and breathe!!

Welcome anfieldspirit

I watch the entire thing you could see that he had been coached on how the answer when to pause, but it did not stop him from looking uncomfortable and embarrassed at certain questions, but I agree with you A.S. they sacked Cable for being bias one way then gave the job to Hunt who was bias the other way. I am wondering if Cable was set up after all it was a Tory paper that broke his story I think Murdoch knew that Vince would find against him and had a word in Scam..er..ons ear would like too know what the rest of you think about this. :bom:

by **Ivan** Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:34 am

sickchip. I spent more than an hour in the wee small hours going through the 390+ messages on the 'Tory scandal' thread and ticking off Leveson-related posts, with a view to moving them all here via an intermediate thread. When I eventually clicked to complete the task, I was told 'session expired'. I'm surprised that you didn't hear me swear!!
Crying or Very sad

If you don't mind, I won't do it all again.

by Blamhappy Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:40 am

I'm actually hurting on your behalf! I'm sure he won't mind in the slightest. I suppose the best thing is to look through for your own posts that are particularly pertinent and bring up that topic here. No problem with discussing things retrospectively.

by sickchip Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:53 am

Ivan,

I feel really bad now Embarassed

- thanks for your efforts though. Don't try again. I think if people can just post on this thread from now on about Leveson that should do.

Thanks again for your endeavours, and I can imagine how annoying the 'session expired' message must've been.

by Mel Sat Jun 02, 2012 10:28 am

If we keep giving Ivan problems and extra work the brilliant man might expire himself into retirement. We certainly don't want than now do we?

by Blamhappy Sat Jun 02, 2012 11:04 am

sickchip feels guilty enough Mel. LOL

It's ages until Leveson returns. I'm going to suffer withdrawal symptoms!

by trevorw2539 Sat Jun 02, 2012 1:00 pm

Blamhappy wrote:sickchip feels guilty enough Mel. LOL

It's ages until Leveson returns. I'm going to suffer withdrawal symptoms!

Heavens above, really.
What would happen then if Eastenders suddenly went off the air. Tranquilisers prescriptions would soar. Work conversations would be minimal. More work would be done.
That's a point. Take off ALL the soaps to boost the economy. Less talk, more work. cheers

Memo. Must suggest the above to DC. Smile

by **Ivan** Sat Jun 02, 2012 1:09 pm

Poor old sickchip made a perfectly reasonable request for all the Leveson posts to be put together. It’s just the sort of thing I often do with other topics, as it makes it easier for members to find the most appropriate thread on which to post. I have to create a separate thread for posts that are to be moved, then the new thread has to be merged with the one where you want all the posts to end up.

It may have wasted a lot of time, but at least I’ve learned from it. I had no idea that the process was time limited, so if I attempt anything on that scale again, I’ll create several small transitory threads and move a few posts at a time, before the session can expire! Nobody’s to blame – it was my decision to attempt it, just one of those things.

by **Ivan** Sat Jun 02, 2012 1:17 pm

trevorw2539. We’re both in danger of straying off topic here, but I think you’ve got things the wrong way round. Soaps, reality programmes, mind-numbing ‘talent’ shows and royal humbug dumb people down and help to stop them noticing the corporate asset-stripping being facilitated by Cameron and his sleazy gang of carpetbaggers.

by **Phil Hornby** Sat Jun 02, 2012 1:44 pm

You deserved better fortune with all those efforts you made, Ivan.

It must have been more than frustrating when it all got lost. Keep up the good work - but think about yourself occasionally, too...!

by Blamhappy Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:12 pm

trevorw2539 wrote:
Blamhappy wrote:sickchip feels guilty enough Mel. LOL

It's ages until Leveson returns. I'm going to suffer withdrawal symptoms!

Heavens above, really.
What would happen then if Eastenders suddenly went off the air. Tranquilisers prescriptions would soar. Work conversations would be minimal. More work would be done.
That's a point. Take off ALL the soaps to boost the economy. Less talk, more work.

Memo. Must suggest the above to DC.

If EastEnders went off the air, I'd be disappointed for sure.

I think loss of the internet would be the most horrible, and it is also probably the worst thing for business!

by skwalker1964 Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:41 pm

Re Cable being removed to make way for Hunt. Cable's 'war declaration' was exposed by the Daily Mail. Am I going too far in having a sudden suspicion that they may have been cued up for it to make room for someone biased in the 'right' direction?

Maybe, but anything seems possible with this lot...

by Mel Sat Jun 02, 2012 3:04 pm

I wouldn't put anything past the creeps SK.

by Mel Sat Jun 02, 2012 3:10 pm

Blam "sickchip feels guilty enough Mel. LOL

LOL?? Is that Lot's of love?? Becky says "no" Very Happy

by Blamhappy Sat Jun 02, 2012 3:38 pm

Hahahaha!

I do remember the days when it was new and people thought it meant "lots of love". David Cameron wasn't alone!

by Redflag Sat Jun 02, 2012 4:47 pm

Ivan wrote:sickchip. I spent more than an hour in the wee small hours going through the 390+ messages on the 'Tory scandal' thread and ticking off Leveson-related posts, with a view to moving them all here via an intermediate thread. When I eventually clicked to complete the task, I was told 'session expired'. I'm surprised that you didn't hear me swear!!

If you don't mind, I won't do it all again.

Sorry Ivan to have given you all that work, Im one of those that posted about Leveson on the Tory scandal thread. cheers

Ivan

by oftenwrong Sat Jun 02, 2012 5:58 pm

skwalker1964 wrote:Re Cable being removed to make way for Hunt. Cable's 'war declaration' was exposed by the Daily Mail. Am I going too far in having a sudden suspicion that they may have been cued up for it to make room for someone biased in the 'right' direction?

Maybe, but anything seems possible with this lot...

There is ample evidence that this Coalition Government is ready and willing to accept policy proposals from wherever they originate, because upon achieving victory they promptly abandoned their Election Promises.
Radical suggestions for reducing employment rights were adopted, together with warmed-over leftovers from Thatcher doctrine. What we now know is that people like the Dirty Digger have had a finger in Government for quite a long time.

by Mel Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:05 pm

Blam: " David Cameron wasn't alone!"

No Blam but he might be in 3yrs time, or hopefully much less.

by Blamhappy Sun Jun 03, 2012 1:01 am

I'd love it to be less. I fear for this country.

by Redflag Sun Jun 03, 2012 8:25 am

skwalker1964 wrote:Re Cable being removed to make way for Hunt. Cable's 'war declaration' was exposed by the Daily Mail. Am I going too far in having a sudden suspicion that they may have been cued up for it to make room for someone biased in the 'right' direction?

Maybe, but anything seems possible with this lot...

I agree skwalker 1964, it does really stink my theory is that Murdoch knew that Cable would not be favourable to his takeover of BSKYB so he had a word with scam..er..on and the rest you can work out for yourself, when it first came out that Murdoch was trying to takeover I knew it was a forgone conclusion for Murdoch to get it, and if it had not been for the Milly Dowler case breaking he would have got away with it Im glad to see that he did not.

by Stox 16 Mon Jun 04, 2012 5:28 am

skwalker1964 wrote:Latest post from my blog skwalker1964.wordpress.com:

This morning I’ve submitted the following Freedom of Information request to David Cameron’s office (point 6 was added, and the whole submitted as a new request, following a very useful suggestion in the comments!):

Dear Prime Minister’s Office,

Under the Freedom of Information Act, I require to know the
following:

1) Whether ministers, special advisors, civil servants and other
government personnel were coached or in any way given preparation
for their testimony to the Leveson enquiry.

2) Whether any such coaching/preparation was provided to
non-government witnesses, and if so, to whom.

3) How any such coaching or preparation was funded.

4) The cost of any such training or coaching.

5) By whom the training/coaching was carried out.

6) Any emails/texts sent from the private or official email accounts and mobile phones of ministers, officials and other agents regarding the above.

Yours faithfully,

Steve Walker

If the Tories have been using public funds to prepare them to defend their wrongdoings, it’s a clear misuse of public funds. Details of who received coaching, and by whom the coaching was done, should be very significant and highly relevant to the results of the enquiry, and to the (un)fitness of Cameron and co to lead the country. If public funds have been used to pay for coaching of any witnesses who are not/no longer in govt, and who might potentially give testimony damaging to the Conservative party, that is even more serious.

Watch this space for news on what response I get.

SW
your spot on. he was coached I would think by Tory party HQ media department. well I only have one more thing to add. if Cameron is this stupid to leave a open sore like Hunt in office then great news for the Labour party. as they can rub the Hunt sore every time they feel like it. while Cameron suffers a loss of face with the public all the time. if I was Cameron Hunt would of gone and I would of drew a line under it. just like he had done with FOX. but keeping Hunt on in his job is just great if I was sitting in the HOC. I would just love it myself.

by Sponsored content