PDA

View Full Version : Bravo! Murdoch's Corruption Costs Him The BSkyB



Gayle in MD
07-13-2011, 09:11 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. has withdrawn its $12 billion bid for BSkyB. The withdrawal represents a devastating blow to Murdoch, who had desperately sought to take full control of the satellite broadcaster. It comes after the British government, which had previously given every indication that it wanted the deal to progress, dramatically withdrew its support for the bid on Tuesday in the wake of the ever-deepening scandal surrounding News Corp and its UK subsidiary, News International.


</div></div>



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The breakdown of the bid came in stages. As public and political pressure mounted, the ruling Coalition government signaled that it was wavering in its support of the deal. News Corp then asked voluntarily for the bid to be referred to an independent commission, delaying the deal by months. After that, the opposition Labour party said it was intending to put forth a resolution
opposing the deal. The government then announced it would support the motion. The vote on the resolution was set to take place Wednesday night. Now, with the withdrawal of the bid, it will presumably not take place.

Ed Milband, the Labour leader, declared victory. "People thought it was beyond belief that Mr Murdoch could continue with his takeover after these revelations," he said. "It is these people who won this victory. They told Mr Murdoch: 'This far and no further.' Nobody should exercise power in this country without responsibility."

Even with the dropping of the bid, the scandal at News International and News Corp is continuing. Murdoch, his son James and News International chief Rebekah Brooks are set to appear before Parliament next week to give evidence about the hacking scandal. In addition, a public inquiry has been set up to examine the inner workings of News International, as well as corruption within Scotland Yard.

There are also rumors that Murdoch is thinking of selling off News International entirely.

Finally, the scandal is threatening to cross over to America, as Senator Jay Rockefeller called for an investigation into News Corp's U.S. practices.
</div></div>

Whoppie!!!!


Finally the worst man since Hitler, having to answer for his corruption!

The pig who admitted pushing the US into the Iraq War, the worst foreign policy fiasco in history!!

I hope he loses everything! Good to know the son is involved, as well.

G.

Soflasnapper
07-13-2011, 12:40 PM
My how the mighty have fallen! Couldn't happen to a more deserving chap.

eg8r
07-13-2011, 12:55 PM
What are the ramifications for BSkyB? Are they equally happy? Is anyone else bidding and are they bidding nearly as high?

eg8r

Gayle in MD
07-13-2011, 01:29 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What are the ramifications for BSkyB? Are they equally happy? Is anyone else bidding and are they bidding nearly as high?

eg8r </div></div>


You missed the point, AGAIN! And, your post shows that you know nothing about the subject, AGAIN!


The subject of this thread is all about Murdoch losing his bidding rights, due to his vast corruption, and disgraceful hidden spying, on innocent people.

How does your post have anything at all to do with the subject of this thread?

G.

eg8r
07-13-2011, 02:34 PM
Wow, must be a "heavy flow" month. You really are pissy.

As for my post, I was asking questions about the company that is no longer being purchased. Is that too tough for you to comprehend?

eg8r

Sev
07-13-2011, 02:43 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. has withdrawn its $12 billion bid for BSkyB. The withdrawal represents a devastating blow to Murdoch, who had desperately sought to take full control of the satellite broadcaster. It comes after the British government, which had previously given every indication that it wanted the deal to progress, dramatically withdrew its support for the bid on Tuesday in the wake of the ever-deepening scandal surrounding News Corp and its UK subsidiary, News International.


</div></div>



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The breakdown of the bid came in stages. As public and political pressure mounted, the ruling Coalition government signaled that it was wavering in its support of the deal. News Corp then asked voluntarily for the bid to be referred to an independent commission, delaying the deal by months. After that, the opposition Labour party said it was intending to put forth a resolution
opposing the deal. The government then announced it would support the motion. The vote on the resolution was set to take place Wednesday night. Now, with the withdrawal of the bid, it will presumably not take place.

Ed Milband, the Labour leader, declared victory. "People thought it was beyond belief that Mr Murdoch could continue with his takeover after these revelations," he said. "It is these people who won this victory. They told Mr Murdoch: 'This far and no further.' Nobody should exercise power in this country without responsibility."

Even with the dropping of the bid, the scandal at News International and News Corp is continuing. Murdoch, his son James and News International chief Rebekah Brooks are set to appear before Parliament next week to give evidence about the hacking scandal. In addition, a public inquiry has been set up to examine the inner workings of News International, as well as corruption within Scotland Yard.

There are also rumors that Murdoch is thinking of selling off News International entirely.

Finally, the scandal is threatening to cross over to America, as Senator Jay Rockefeller called for an investigation into News Corp's U.S. practices.
</div></div>

Whoppie!!!!


Finally the worst man since Hitler, having to answer for his corruption!

The pig who admitted pushing the US into the Iraq War, the worst foreign policy fiasco in history!!

I hope he loses everything! Good to know the son is involved, as well.

G. </div></div>

Huh. Seems to me Murdoch just saved himself a boat load of cash.
It has also been stated that they may pursue the purchase in the near future once everything has settled down.

Gayle in MD
07-13-2011, 02:53 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wow, must be a "heavy flow" month. You really are pissy.

As for my post, I was asking questions about the company that is no longer being purchased. Is that too tough for you to comprehend?

eg8r </div></div>

That's a filthy comment, Ed. Sexist and rude.

Is that what your parents taught you?

I've had enough of you for a while. You never know when to simmer down, and always go to the filth.

What would the men in your Christian "Men's Group" think of such a filthy, rude comment?

Disgusting!

The plans of the company, as I stated, are not the subject of this thread.

Once again, you get filthy, and your misogynist views show up, when you are proven wrong.

Grow up!

G.

eg8r
07-13-2011, 03:06 PM
Ah, you going after someone's religion is never too far away is it. Attack, attack, attack. Instead of attacking always, why don't you take some advice and go look at the way you have responded to my posts right from the get go and see if you cannot figure it out.

You are the last person to ever, and I mean ever, talk to someone else about staying on subject. This is something that, frankly, you are pathetic at doing. If you want to ask what my parents taught me fine, but with you there is no reason to ask, you just were never taught what it means to "stay on subject".

I wasn't proven wrong about anything, I simply asked a question and you had a "time of the month" moment in response. One thing that is always agreed on when referring to a joke and that is there is always a layer of truth built in. Think about it.

eg8r

Sev
07-13-2011, 03:08 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ah, you going after someone's religion is never too far away is it. Attack, attack, attack. Instead of attacking always, why don't you take some advice and go look at the way you have responded to my posts right from the get go and see if you cannot figure it out.

You are the last person to ever, and I mean ever, talk to someone else about staying on subject. This is something that, frankly, you are pathetic at doing. If you want to ask what my parents taught me fine, but with you there is no reason to ask, you just were never taught what it means to "stay on subject".

I wasn't proven wrong about anything, I simply asked a question and you had a "time of the month" moment in response. One thing that is always agreed on when referring to a joke and that is there is always a layer of truth built in. Think about it.

eg8r </div></div>

Its probably just dementia setting. That much hatred is bound to addle ones wits at some point.

ugotda7
07-13-2011, 03:33 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wow, must be a "heavy flow" month. You really are pissy.

As for my post, I was asking questions about the company that is no longer being purchased. Is that too tough for you to comprehend?

eg8r </div></div>

Never trust anything that bleeds for three days and doesn't die.

cushioncrawler
07-13-2011, 07:26 PM
Prix like murdoch shood be kicked out of papers and radio and TV.
The only thing any gov-watchdog ever did in ozz or england or theusofa iz to impoze fines on liberals for saying naughty words.
mac.

Gayle in MD
07-13-2011, 11:12 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Prix like murdoch shood be kicked out of papers and radio and TV.
</div></div>

That may well be the final result.

We do have FBI in the UK, and they are definitely in on all of the investigations.

Murdoch stands to lose everything, all news papers, and all of his national television stations.

Following the money shouldn't be that hard, either.

Knowing that his organization hacked into the cell phones of 9/11 victims, and their families, make me want to throw up!

Another corrupt, power hungry, RW pig, one of many.

G.

eg8r
07-14-2011, 09:17 AM
LOL, very funny but might get you in trouble with you know who. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif We are only allowed to joke about anything in the world that does not involve her.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
07-14-2011, 10:42 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What are the ramifications for BSkyB? Are they equally happy? Is anyone else bidding and are they bidding nearly as high?

eg8r </div></div>

Don't know, haven't seen that aspect addressed in the coverage I've been reading.

It would seem there had been other bids, and maybe if so, another suitor might come in again (although at a lower figure perhaps).

Or maybe it was a hostile takeover bid from Murdoch, and they are fine with not being bought out. Could be either way, and maybe they are bereft of buyers and very sad.

It's a side effect of the real story, and the result of official condemnation of Murdoch and his companies for very real and criminal offenses. They may be innocent collateral damage.

eg8r
07-14-2011, 12:05 PM
Thanks for the response. Gayle was not enough of an adult to respond accordingly.

If Murdoch and company broke the law I am all for them being tossed in prison and serve their time but this other part of the story is intersting to me.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
07-14-2011, 12:18 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What are the ramifications for BSkyB? Are they equally happy? Is anyone else bidding and are they bidding nearly as high?

eg8r </div></div>

Don't know, haven't seen that aspect addressed in the coverage I've been reading.

It would seem there had been other bids, and maybe if so, another suitor might come in again (although at a lower figure perhaps).

Or maybe it was a hostile takeover bid from Murdoch, and they are fine with not being bought out. Could be either way, and maybe they are bereft of buyers and very sad.

It's a side effect of the real story, and the result of official condemnation of Murdoch and his companies for very real and criminal offenses. They may be innocent collateral damage. </div></div>

I get tired of Ed asking questions that are clearly answered in the original post, with links, which if accessed, would answer his questions.

As you can see....his first two questions were answered before he asked them:

Ed:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What are the ramifications for BSkyB? Are they equally happy? Is anyone else bidding and are they bidding nearly as high?

</div></div>



From my original post:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. has withdrawn its $12 billion bid for BSkyB. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>The withdrawal represents a devastating blow to Murdoch, who had desperately sought to take full control of the satellite broadcaster.</span> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>It comes after the British government, which had previously given every indication that it wanted the deal to progress, dramatically withdrew its support for the bid on Tuesday in the wake of the ever-deepening scandal surrounding News Corp and its UK subsidiary, News International.</span>
</div></div>

The third question could have been found had he bothered to read.

Nice of you to provide him with answers, I got tired of doing that long ago.

His accusations that I change the subject, come from his frustration, and denial, whenI point out in many posts, ABOUT THE SUBJECT AT HAND, the causes of our devastating problems which have come about through failed Repiglican policies.


Pointing out the failed Repiglican policies, and showing how they are linked to our current economic, and foreign policy difficultires, on-going economic issues of the day, is experienced by Ed as changing the subject.

G.

eg8r
07-14-2011, 12:32 PM
Are you still sleepy?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r's first two questions</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What are the ramifications for BSkyB? Are they equally happy?</div></div><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: gayle's response to Sofla about me</div><div class="ubbcode-body">From my original post, his first two questions were already addressed:"Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. has withdrawn its $12 billion bid for BSkyB. The withdrawal represents a devastating blow to Murdoch, who had desperately sought to take full control of the satellite broadcaster. It comes after the British government, which had previously given every indication that it wanted the deal to progress, dramatically withdrew its support for the bid on Tuesday in the wake of the ever-deepening scandal surrounding News Corp and its UK subsidiary, News International."
</div></div>Hmm, does gayle know the difference between Murdoch and BSkyB? I ask a question about THE OTHER COMPANY and gayle ignores the actual words that were typed and continues acting like I am asking about the effects on Murdoch. Sleepy? Lack of comprehension? What other reasonable explanation could there be? I have offered advice to her about thinking before you speak but you know the saying about old dogs and new tricks.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The third question could have been found had he bothered to follow the links....
</div></div>Well at least you did not post another example quote that did not make any sense.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
07-14-2011, 01:15 PM
Actually, you are the one who is slipping.

I didn't post any links, LMAO!

G.

eg8r
07-15-2011, 08:49 AM
Where in the post you were responding to did I mention the word "link" or "links"? I did say "quote" which happens to be what you do when you put all those words in the boxes but I thought you knew that.

Old dogs, new tricks? Are you slipping, YEP!!!

eg8r

Soflasnapper
07-15-2011, 10:38 AM
Murdoch still holds a substantial share in BSKYB. The OTHER major shareholder wants him out, I've heard.

Gayle in MD
07-18-2011, 01:48 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Murdoch still holds a substantial share in BSKYB. The OTHER major shareholder wants him out, I've heard. </div></div>

Ten in the UK, have now been arrested, as of this morning, eight of which were employed with Murdoch,.

This is going to continue to grow into more International outrage, as I'm quite sure, given what we've all watched going on at Fux Noise, for years, there is very likely just as much underhanded corruption going on here in the US, as in the UK.

G.