We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. If you continue to use this site, we'll assume you're happy with this. Alternatively, click here to find out how to manage these cookies

hide cookie message
Contact Forum Editor

Send an email to our Forum Editor:


PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the Forum Editor know who sent the message. Both your name and email address will not be used for any other purpose.

Speakers Corner


It's free to register, to post a question or to start / join a discussion


 

Cameron at Leveson Inquiry on Thursday


natdoor

Likes # 0

I see that Cameron is scheduled to be the only witness at the inquiry on Thursday. There is one question, partly raised during Hunt's appearance, which I believe will be most significant and which has not been discussed thus far in the media to my knowledge.

It concerns the decision to replace Cable by Hunt. Cable was replaced because he told undercover reporters that he was at war with Murdoch. So he was prejudiced against News International. Cameron has subsequently stated that it was the right decision to appoint Hunt in place of Cable, despite Hunt having made his prejudice in favour of N.I. quite clear. So one prejudiced person is not acceptble but another is. Cameron has confidence in one being able to act fairly and with integrity, despite eing prejudiced, but not the other.

In my view, there are only three possible reasons why Cameron acted as he did and all of them spell big trouble for him.

Like this post
buteman

Likes # 0

At the Leveson Inquiry yesterday one of the Questions he was asked was if employing Andy Coulson was a good idea after him leaving the News off the world in respect of phone hacking scandal.

Gave him a 2nd chance he said and with all his contacts and his experience he thought that he was the right man for the job.

And in another statement that he gave without being asked he said Andy Coulson had actually published a story about him which was completely untrue and none of it was true.

So you maybe have to ask If he quit his job because of the phone hacking scandal and had told lies about the Pm, why would he still want to employ him.

Maybe it was put another way the PM may have said that what Coulson had printed was untrue and nothing in the story was true,To me that is lying does not matter what polite way you put it.

I was surprised that he was not asked the question if you new he was a liar or told untruth's why would you want to employ him.

But alas the question was never asked.

I am sure someone can delve into the facts and tell me if I got it right or wrong.

Like this post
spuds

Likes # 0

There was an investigation documentary program on television the other week. In that program it referred to a group of selective people who had regular dinner style party's in the Cotswold's or Chiltern's (I forget which area now) and as such were referred to within circles as a very selective 'Group' of people.

Surprising how some of the names mentioned in this 'Group' are also being mentioned in the Leveson Inquiry?.

Like this post
natdoor

Likes # 0

Having reviewed the evidence to the inquiry, there was acceptance without question that Cable could not remain in charge of the BSkyB process. Cameron made much of Cable's comments having made publicly, which, of course, they were not. He does once say they were made public.

The view taken seems to be that Cable's comment was embarrassing for the government and was deemed too heinous to permit him to remain in charge of the BSkyB situation. Bearing in mind the way in which these comments were made, not knowing the context within which they were made and that they were related to Murdoch personally, rather than to News International, I do not believe that the decision to replace him can be justified without asserting that he is incapable of setting aside a prejudice when required to do so. That being the case, he should not be in the Cabinet.

buteman

The topic to which you are referring relates to the "Hug a hoodie" headline. Cameron says he did not use those words so, if portrayed as a direct quote the they were tantamount to a lie. However, Cameron accepted them as a distorted reprsentation of his generalpoint, something which the press do on a daily basis. I seem to remember fourm member bemoaning the fact that the public laps up "reported facts", interpretations of events made by the press in pursuit of their own agenda. Perhaps he should reflect on the ownership and political leanings of the press and who benefits from their bias.

Like this post
buteman

Likes # 0

Thanks Natdoor I had no idea as to what he was referring to.Thanks for putting me in the Picture.Just a little white lie then and nothing serious.

Like this post
Snec

Likes # 0

Leveson needs to focus on what that means for our democracy.

He may conclude, like me, that democracy would work if it were not continually undermined by politicians. It no longer achieves what it is supposed to, that is why people are voting less. It's a waste of time and effort since they are all seem to be working to personal agendas and not for the good of the country. Newspapers are at least honest in what they want to achieve, i.e. sales.

Like this post
natdoor

Likes # 0

fourm member

It surely includes consideration of whether decisions were influenced by the attitude of press barons. Some may smell a rat in the replacing of an anti-Murdoch individual by someone pro-Murdoch in the manner in which it was done.

Like this post
spuds

Likes # 0

I made a slight prediction on page 1 about politicians, and it looks like that prediction might have a little substance, because news reports just coming out would suggest that Leveson as threatened to quit?.

Apparently the Education Secretary Michael Gove, who was once a journalist working for News Corporation owned Times, as made some rather serious comments?.

No doubt today's or tomorrows newspapers will have the full story?.

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

spuds

The Mail on Sunday will no doubt have a story that Leveson threatened to quit, but it isn't true. Michael Gove was speaking back in February, and said that he was concerned that the debate around the hearings could erode freedom of speech.

He was blathering, and Leveson subsequently told him that he (Leveson) didn't need a reminder about the importance of free speech.

Mail on Sunday + scant information = dramatic headline

Like this post
spuds

Likes # 0

Can we assume that the BBC correspondent was once a journalist and possibly still is today?.

The next thing that we will be hearing is that Jeremy Clarkson as made a comment on this whole affair. Now that would really upset some people :O)

Like this post

Reply to this topic

This thread has been locked.



IDG UK Sites

New iPhone 6 review: best ever iPhone is very good... but no longer the best phone you can buy

IDG UK Sites

Is Apple losing confidence in itself?

IDG UK Sites

Professional photo and video techniques for perfect colours

IDG UK Sites

How (and where) to buy an iPhone 6 or iPhone 6 Plus in the UK. Plus: What to do if you pre-ordered...