PDA

View Full Version : Rebekah Brooks Charged Over Phone Hacking



Qtec
05-15-2012, 05:55 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Rebekah Brooks Charged Over Phone Hacking: Faces Criminal Trial For 'Perverting The Course Of Justice'

Rebekah Brooks, the former head of Rupert Murdoch's British newspaper wing and a key figure in the phone hacking crisis, is to face criminal charges over the scandal, it was announced Tuesday.

The Crown Prosecution Service said that Brooks "conspired with her husband, Charles Brooks, and others to pervert the course of justice." Speaking at a press conference, Alison Levitt, the chief adviser to the Director of Public Prosecutions, said that Brooks, her husband, her assistant, their chauffeur, their security and the head of security at News International had all been charged. She claimed that Brooks and her assistant had illegally removed seven boxes of material from News International headquarters, and that the group had tried to conceal information from the police about the phone hacking scandal.

In a statement, Brooks and her husband said, ""We deplore this weak and unjust decision. After the further unprecedented posturing of the CPS we will respond later today after our return from the police station." </div></div>

Really? How are you going to explain this!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Brooks was arrested in March and questioned about the allegations that led to Tuesday's formal prosecution. She was also arrested in July of 2011 in relation to corruption.

Around that time, police found a bag with a computer, phone and documents in a bin near Brooks' London home. Charlie Brooks later tried to retrieve it from police, saying that it had accidentally wound up in the trash and had nothing to do with his wife. </div></div>

Read it here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/18/mystery-bag-bin-rebekah-brooks)

Finally some justice and accountability.

Q....

Gayle in MD
05-15-2012, 06:30 AM
<span style="color: #990000">I just hope they don't let the Murdochs off. They were both, father and son, clearly just as guilty Rebekah.

What do you think will happen?

G. </span>

eg8r
05-17-2012, 09:50 AM
Give this person the same sentence as you would the head of NSA who is stuffing secret docs in his pants and fleeing out the front door.

eg8r

cushioncrawler
05-17-2012, 04:10 PM
Its good that police kan nail crooks by uzing peripheral laws. A bit like tax and scarface. A bit like watergate.
And it iznt even a major faktor if rebekah woznt aktually guilty of any other stuff. She might be innocent re other stuff, but it seems u karnt burn books if there iz an investigation going on. Or praps even before the investigation starts, not sure.
mac.

Gayle in MD
05-18-2012, 06:29 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Give this person the same sentence as you would the head of NSA who is stuffing secret docs in his pants and fleeing out the front door.

eg8r </div></div>

<span style="color: #CC0000">That would be panty hose. North put them in his secretary's panty hose. It was so good of him to keep Reagan out of jail like that.</span>

eg8r
05-21-2012, 01:47 AM
LOL, Sandy Berger doesn't wear pantyhose but maybe you know more. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

eg8r

Gayle in MD
05-21-2012, 04:17 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL, Sandy Berger doesn't wear pantyhose but maybe you know more. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

eg8r </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Give this person the same sentence as you would the head of NSA who is stuffing secret docs in his pants and fleeing out the front door.

eg8r </div></div>

Sandy Berger didn't steal or destroy any official documents.

In April 2005, Berger pled guilty to a <span style='font-size: 20pt'>misdemeanor</span> charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material from the National Archives in Washington. <span style='font-size: 20pt'>According to the lead prosecutor in the case Berger only took copies of classified information and no original material was destroyed.</span>

Next personal attack?


G.

eg8r
05-22-2012, 01:16 AM
LOL, you really are gullible.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
05-22-2012, 06:04 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL, you really are gullible.

eg8r </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Give this person the same sentence as you would the head of NSA who is stuffing secret docs in his pants and fleeing out the front door.

eg8r

</div></div>

The facts prove that your statement was wrong.

Hence, comes another of your personal attacks.

G.

Qtec
05-22-2012, 07:09 AM
Are you aware that a young girl went missing and that Murdoch papers hacked her voice mail?


As usual, you have absolutely no knowledge about this subject but you flap away anyway!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Missing Milly Dowler's voicemail was hacked by News of the World

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>Deleted voicemails gave family false hope</span>
Hacking interfered with police hunt
Family lawyer: actions 'heinous and despicable'
</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The News of the World illegally targeted the missing schoolgirl Milly Dowler and her family in March 2002, interfering with police inquiries into her disappearance, an investigation by the Guardian has established.

Scotland Yard is investigating the episode, which is likely to put new pressure on the then editor of the paper, <span style='font-size: 17pt'>Rebekah Brooks, now Rupert Murdoch's chief executive in the UK; and the then deputy editor, Andy Coulson, who resigned in January as the prime minister's media adviser.</span>

The Dowlers' family lawyer, Mark Lewis, this afternoon issued a statement describing the News of the World's activities as "heinous" and "despicable". He said this afternoon the Dowler family was now pursuing a damages claim against the News of the World.

Milly Dowler disappeared at the age of 13 on her way home in Walton-on-Thames, Surrey, on 21 March 2002.

Detectives from Scotland Yard's new inquiry into the phone hacking, Operation Weeting, are believed to have found evidence of the targeting of the Dowlers in a collection of 11,000 pages of notes kept by Glenn Mulcaire, the private investigator jailed for phone hacking on behalf of the News of the World.

In the last four weeks the Met officers have approached Surrey police and taken formal statements from some of those involved in the original inquiry, who were concerned about how News of the World journalists intercepted and deleted the voicemail messages of Milly Dowler.

<span style='font-size: 23pt'>The messages were deleted by journalists in the first few days after Milly's disappearance in order to free up space for more messages.</span> As a result friends and relatives of Milly <span style='font-size: 26pt'>concluded wrongly that she might still be alive.</span> Police feared evidence may have been destroyed. </div></div>

News for you, yeah?


Imagine it your daughter's voice mail that was hacked for a news story when she was still missing? What if by their actions they gave you false hope?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Family lawyer: actions 'heinous and despicable' </div></div>

I totally agree.

Q

eg8r
05-22-2012, 09:15 AM
I said punish the peson if they are guilty. Why do you object to that?

eg8r

Gayle in MD
05-22-2012, 01:11 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I said punish the peson if they are guilty. Why do you object to that?

eg8r </div></div>

Here is what you actually said.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Give this person the same sentence as you would the head of NSA who is stuffing secret docs in his pants and fleeing out the front door.

eg8r
</div></div>

As you can easily see, you skewed the subject of this thread, as always, over to what you <span style='font-size: 14pt'>thought</span> was a case of a Democrat stealing secret documets, using it to distract from the main thrust of the thread, by taking a shot at Democrats, when actually, no official documents were taken, by Berger, nor destroyed, according to the prosecutor of the case, unlike the case of Oliver North, and his secretary, who did take AND destroy official documents.

Berger's action was a misdemeanor.

But North?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>The scandal was compounded when Oliver North destroyed or hid pertinent documents between November 21 and November 25, 1986. During North's trial in 1989, his secretary, Fawn Hall, testified extensively about helping North alter, shred, and remove official United States National Security Council (NSC) documents from the White House. According to The New York Times, enough documents were put into a government shredder to jam it.[38] North's explanation for destroying some documents was to protect the lives of individuals involved in Iran and Contra operations.[38] It was not until years after the trial that North's notebooks were made public, and only after the National Security Archive and Public Citizen sued the Office of the Independent Council under the Freedom of Information Act.[38]</span><span style='font-size: 14pt'><span style='font-size: 14pt'>During the trial North testified that on November 21, 22, or 24, he witnessed Poindexter destroy what may have been the only signed copy of a presidential covert-action finding that sought to authorize CIA participation in the November 1985 Hawk missile shipment to Iran</span>.[38] US Attorney General Edwin Meese admitted on November 25 that profits from weapons sales to Iran were made available to assist the Contra rebels in Nicaragua. On the same day, John Poindexter resigned, and Oliver North was fired by President Reagan.[53] Poindexter was replaced by Frank Carlucci on December 2, 1986.[54]

In his expose Veil: The Secret Wars of the CIA 19811987, journalist Bob Woodward chronicles the role of the CIA in facilitating the transfer of funds from the Iran arms sales to the Nicaraguan Contras spearheaded by Oliver North.[55] Then Director of the CIA, William J. Casey, admitted to Woodward in February 1987 that he was aware of the diversion of funds to the contras confirming a number of encounters documented by Woodward.[56] The admission occurred while Casey was hospitalized for a stroke. On May 6, 1987 William Casey died the day after Congress began its public hearings on the Iran-contra affair.</span> </div></div>

Ronald Reagan was a liar and a crook.

Interestingly enough, the very same Michael Ledeen, who is expected to have been the go-between between Cheney, and the Italian thugs who broke into the Niger Embassy, and stole ONLY the Embassy stationary, and official seal, just enough to create fake documents about Saddam's Yellow Cake, all of it Bull****, all of it used by GW Bush to lie this country into a war.



Before you throw out accusations, you sould take the time to research for the truth. Once you do sok, you'll find that Republicans have a history of lying, paying off terrorists and drug dealers, and letting their underlings take the fall for them.

In the meantime, this thread is about the CROOK Rupert Murdoch, his son, and Rebekah, all of them lying crooks, who hacked into a murdered young girls' cell phone, putting her parents through pure pergatory, as well as having paid off the police, and possibly the Prime Minister, as well.

Not that you would know anything about any of this, or you wouldn't have used such an absolutely absurd comeback about Sady Berger!

BWA HA HA HA....you are always so consistantly uninformed.

G.

eg8r
05-23-2012, 02:38 AM
Yes and what I actually said is punish them the same way you punished the last guilty person. Why do you object to punishing the guilty?

eg8r

Qtec
05-23-2012, 06:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes and what I actually said is punish them the same way you punished the last guilty person. Why do you object to punishing the guilty?

eg8r </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In April 2005, Berger pled guilty to a misdemeanor charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material from the National Archives in Washington. According to the lead prosecutor in the case <span style='font-size: 26pt'>Berger only took copies of classified information and no original material was destroyed. </span></div></div>

Got it dilhole? NO DAMAGE DONE.

OTOH, Rebecca tried to destroy the evidence of her complicity in this vile act.

Q

Oh, BTW, Bush was complicit in the 9/11 attacks.



PROVE ME WRONG.

Q

Gayle in MD
05-23-2012, 06:40 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes and what I actually said is punish them the same way you punished the last guilty person. Why do you object to punishing the guilty?

eg8r </div></div>leaving your lie about Berger out entirely, as though you never made the incorrect accusaion that you made.

You're taking what you said, and cherry picking, to leave out your lie,


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Give this person the same sentence as you would the <span style='font-size: 17pt'>head of NSA who is stuffing secret docs in his pants and fleeing out the front door.</span>eg8r


</div></div>

and then, ignoring the FACT that what you wrote, was a lie, then you top it all off, by twisting my answer, into something I never even said. No one here said they objected to punishing the guilty, we're all just sick of you rewriting history to suit your twisted, partisan views, and lying about what occured, always in an effort to slander those with a D. next to their name, and then claiming that we do that, but you never do that!

You are impossible!

eg8r
05-23-2012, 08:00 AM
LOL, whatever. I have always kept the same position, no matter the person or the situation...If they are guilty then punish them. Why do you object to punishing the guilty? If you don't then you agree to what I am saying.

eg8r

eg8r
05-23-2012, 08:02 AM
No that is not it. You are dreaming if you believe that story. However, since it is a (D) I understand you giving the pass.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
05-23-2012, 08:09 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL, whatever. I have always kept the same position, no matter the person or the situation...If they are guilty then punish them. Why do you object to punishing the guilty? If you don't then you agree to what I am saying.

eg8r </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL, whatever. I have always kept the same position, no matter the person or the situation... </div></div>

No you don't! YOU just condemned a man, Sandy Berger, with a D., for doing something he never did.

The guilty person in this thread, is YOU.

Distracting from the subject of the thread? GUILTY!

Lying about what others wrote? GUILTY!

Refusing to achnowledge that what you wrote about Berger was false? Guilty!

Attacking the intellect of others, when it is clear that YOU are the one who can't follow what others have written?

GUILTY!

YOU ARE STILL leaving your lie about Berger out entirely, as though you never made the incorrect accusation that you made.

Additionally, you are still falsely accusing me of having opinions that I do not have, and that I did not write.

And YOU tell OTHER people they can't read?

YOU?

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

G.

Qtec
05-23-2012, 09:00 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No that is not it. You are dreaming if you believe that story. However, since it is a (D) I understand you giving the pass.

eg8r </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">On July 19, 2004, it was revealed that the U.S. Justice Department was investigating Berger for unauthorized removal of classified documents in October 2003 from a National Archives reading room prior to testifying before the 9/11 Commission. The documents were five classified copies of a single report commissioned from Richard Clarke, covering internal assessments of the Clinton administration's handling of the unsuccessful 2000 millennium attack plots. An associate of Berger said Berger took one copy in September 2003 and four copies in October 2003.[16]

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>After a long investigation, Justice Department prosecutors determined that Berger only removed classified copies of data stored on hard drives stored in the National Archives, and that no original material was destroyed.</span>[17] Berger eventually pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material on April 1, 2005. Berger was fined $50,000,[18] sentenced to serve two years of probation and 100 hours of community service, and stripped of his security clearance for 3 years.[19] The Justice Department initially said Berger stole only copies of classified documents and not originals. </div></div>

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>Not the same as destroying evidence.</span>

Q

Soflasnapper
05-23-2012, 09:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Give this person the same sentence as you would the head of NSA who is stuffing secret docs in his pants and fleeing out the front door.

eg8r </div></div>

NSC.

eg8r
05-23-2012, 10:47 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No you don't! YOU just condemned a man, Sandy Berger, with a D., for doing something he never did.

</div></div>Sure I did not. And if he did not do anything then don't punish him. LOL, you really are having a comprehension problem.

eg8r

eg8r
05-23-2012, 10:47 AM
LOL, dream on.

eg8r