Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

That entire news article is an op-ed piece (it's not even an actual news story) that serves no purpose other than to try to convince the audience that this guy's death wasn't suspicious at all and does nothing but corroborate my point.

Show me any similar op-ed about a recent death due to drugs.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

Presidents and politicians (elected to power and given a public trust) are held to a different standard than a media mogul who runs a media empire. Did a reporter or investigator do something illegal? Perhaps. It's not going to be the first (or last) time that's ever happened in the media though since the media exists to investigate, uncover and report its findings.


Again, do we know he knew the information being obtained was due to hacking or are we making that assumption based on circumstantial evidence? I don't see how Murdoch supporting a manager of a company Murdoch owns during a time of a media witch-hunt is damning enough to say he knew everything about the dealings of said company, manager or her employees.


I don't know a whole bunch about the story. Where they all 'random citizens' or were they the intended target for a specific purpose? I don't agree with hacking but I'm not going to say Murdoch was the evil mastermind when I don't know if he was or wasn't.


I thought Fox News was going to get a bad name by association, not because someone in some other company did something illegal. What did Fox News do that was so illegal?



K.

PSEDIT: see sig

I don't THINK he knew about it, but he may have. My gut feeling though is that his top executive(s) was/were aware of it, and were just trying to get more juicy stories to increase sales and make Murdoch (and themselves) more money.

I just think his network is so large that it is very possible he doesn't know every little thing that each of his top executives does. I don't think this frees him from culpability. At the end of the day, he is signing the checks. Just like the BP situation. Even though it was a contracted company that cut corners, BP was signing the checks so they are at fault.

Regardless he'll still get negative PR for it, so it's funny all the same.

Says who? You're saying that someone who's a major power in our mass media isn't, de facto, in a position of public trust?

Trust isn't even the issue. The issue is he committed a serious crime.



Yes. Some hacking and also bribery of public officials.



"See sig".

The accusations are diverse. In some cases public officials were paid off to disclose confidential information. In others, 9/11 victims and various political figures had their phones hacked into. Most damning are accusations from mainstream British politicians that company hooligans invaded their lives.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/for ... story.html

This isn't someone who would make such a powerful accusation lightly.



They're two rooms in the same house. In fact when NoW was disbanded Murdoch made a point of re-hiring all its people elsewhere in his empire so the premise different companies are discrete is invalid.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

This is one of the most enduring mass delusions about people in positions of leadership.

People said the same thing about the czars, about presidents, about French kings, and about dictators in every time and place - that they are at the head of something so large and so distant that they can't know what's going on.

It is a way the mind protects itself from having to think difficult thoughts.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

So, here I am saying we should wait and see what happens before we chastise this man for something he may or may not have done. Then, in your all-knowing brilliance, you try to tell me I'm wrong by rattling off a list of accusations and conspiracies. Neither are enough to convict a man (at this stage) of a criminal act.

Also, you haven't stated what illegal acts Fox News committed; just saying they're different rooms in the same house isn't good enough, because SpeedTV is also a room in that house... and I doubt you're going to say they're doing illegal acts, too.

PS: see sig and get the fuck out.

All that said, it's still possible that he didn't know.

Trust me, it doesn't help me sleep any better...it wouldn't surprise me if he did know or even ordered the hacking to be done and what not.

Basically, I'm saying we have no proof that he did or did not know what was going on.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

If he didn't know, he'd have gone for full disclosure from the get-go - or simply do what he does when he's not scared shitless and remain aloof from the entire affair - and not rapidly switch between strategies whose only constant is insulating him from real or potential blame.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

so the cops are in on the conspiracy too, seeing as how they don't see anything suspicious, right?

or was there some super toxin that made his heart explode like a heart attack would look(or whatever killed him) that is completely undetectable by modern science?

c'mon man, I'm not saying its NOT suspicious, but you can't call "FIRE" when you see what you tuhink might be smoke when it could in fact be steam, or fog.

Pretty much this. I fucking hate Rupert Murdoch, and am very pleased that this shit storm is swirling around him...but at the same time, I can't be judge jury and executioner and say with 100% certainty that he knew about it.

You're right. It's not. You're running your mouth from the realm of Aestu's world, where people are simply branded whatever Aestu thinks they should be branded, regardless of the hard evidence which may or may not exist. In the real world, if there was a crime committed by Mr. Murdoch (as you're suggesting), there would be a trial... and during that trial a verdict expressing whether or not Murdoch is guilty of whatever crimes being charged against him. Since you don't live in the real world, I don't expect you to understand this. You should visit us sometime.


Again, I'm not sure how your list of accusations are the works of Fox News. From what I understand, News of the World may be guilty of those things but News of the World was not Fox News. Your assertion that NotW's employees were hired by Fox News (or other News Corp companies) doesn't mean Fox News is guilty of the things NotW did; I can't read more into this since my Google-fu appears weaker than yours. Perhaps you'd be so kind to substantiate that claim?

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

Except the evidence does exist. At least most of it, save the guy who conveniently dropped dead the day before he was to testify before Parliament.

-British PM said he was harassed by their thugs
-Messages were deleted by hackers
-Several powerful police commissioners and ministers resigned because they took money


Ok. Replace "Fox News" with "Murdoch's empire".

...why would a company make a point of hiring known criminals in a tight jobs market?

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

The Wikileaks contributors have hacked a lot more than just governments. While I realize how many of you have some sort of deranged phobia about corporations, they're private enterprises, and Wikileaks contributors hacked quite a few of them. It's the exact same thing, it's just that a lot of people have saved their 'outrage' for a person/group doing the exact same thing that doesn't share their political biases.



Someone should probably tell Dr. "smarter and better informed than the rest of you" that Nixon was never impeached. The House Judiciary Committee voted in favor of the Articles of Impeachment for Obstruction of justice, but Nixon resigned before there was a vote for impeachment in the House. The dubious honor of having been impeached as president belongs only to Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, so far as I know.



Why is it OK for you to obstinately cling to whatever idiotic point you're advancing even after it's obvious what you're saying is so out of phase with reality that it could walk through walls, but you think everyone else is a dill-hole when they do it?

The real topping on the sundae is this bit, which we should all add to our signatures so that we may also enjoy monotonously scribbling "refer to sig" when a certain someone says, as he often does, that the burden of proof is on the person asserting the facts:



Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste