LeMaquis Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 The Guardian is reporting that some Sun journalists are going to contact a leading human rights lawyer; http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/feb/15/sun-staff-news-corp-inquiry. I don't know if that's political correctness gone mad or madness gone politically correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 The Guardian is reporting that some Sun journalists are going to contact a leading human rights lawyer; http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/feb/15/sun-staff-news-corp-inquiry. I don't know if that's political correctness gone mad or madness gone politically correct. Haha wouldn't surprise me. Cretinous Jon Gaunt who used his weekly column to mock the Human Rights organisation Liberty, ran crying to Liberty when he was sacked from his job at a radio station. I've no sympathy. Still I doubt these jornalists are worried about going to jail. After all, jails these days are holiday camps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank ryan Posted February 15, 2012 Author Share Posted February 15, 2012 Trevor Kavanagh (associated editor of the Sun) used his column this last Monday to complain that 5 senior journalists: "Were needlesslessly dragged from their beds in dawn raids and humiliated while their homes were ransacked by officers". He accused the police of treating them "like members of an organised crime gang". As far as I'm concerned the Sun are just getting what they have been happy to dish out over the decades and they dont like it. I think kavanagh is great - he's saying 'it's outrageous that the police are investigating the crimes we committed, when they could be investigating the crimes other people did instead' - if the rozzers were on my tail, I'd probably think the same. 'organized crime gang' is exactly what he was running. DON'T CHUFFIN' BUY IT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liam1412 Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 News International is talking about draining the swamp but I think a sewer is a more accurate metaphor. It doesn't look good for the newspaper's survival. Murdoch will pull the plug as he did with the NOTW. I wonder which rag the retards who read the Sun will switch to in future. How incredibly arrogant of you. Some people read the paper out of choice, and some may find other papers a little heavy going. We aren't all well educated, but does that give people who find more intellectually worded papers difficult less right to know what is going on in the world. I'm not particularly fussed which paper I get my news from but I know one thing for sure. I would much rather spend a night with a sun reader than a stuck up prick like yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppins Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 How incredibly arrogant of you. Some people read the paper out of choice, and some may find other papers a little heavy going. We aren't all well educated, but does that give people who find more intellectually worded papers difficult less right to know what is going on in the world. I'm not particularly fussed which paper I get my news from but I know one thing for sure. I would much rather spend a night with a sun reader than a stuck up prick like yourself. Right or wrong I like your way of thinking liam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caparo Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 I'm not saying it isn't popular, I'm saying it's corrupt and that news international acts like a gangster set up in 1930s chicago - paying off public officials and using protection racket tactics - we break the the law, you intervene and you'll regret it. without news international the country would be a much better place. I do hope their lawyers aren't reading this. There is a great deal of difference between statements regarding someone who has been convicted of a crime and someone who is merely being questioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caparo Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 LINK How wrong can you get? Did you actually read your own link?? Support for 'New Labour' The Sun switched support to Labour on 18 March 1997, six weeks before the General Election victory which saw Labour leader Tony Blair become Prime Minister with a large parliamentary majority, despite the paper having attacked Blair and New Labour up to a month earlier. Its front page headline read THE SUN BACKS BLAIR and its front page editorial made clear that while it still opposed some New Labour policies, such as the Minimum Wage and Devolution, it believed Blair to be "the breath of fresh air this great country needs." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libuse Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Trevor Kavanagh (associated editor of the Sun) used his column this last Monday to complain that 5 senior journalists: "Were needlesslessly dragged from their beds in dawn raids and humiliated while their homes were ransacked by officers". He accused the police of treating them "like members of an organised crime gang". As far as I'm concerned the Sun are just getting what they have been happy to dish out over the decades and they dont like it. Although Kavanagh did manage to bite his tongue about such tactics when the police did exactly the same to Harry Rednapp, tipping off the Sun in advance so that their reporters could be there to capture the moment. That must have been morally very difficult for him.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 I do hope their lawyers aren't reading this. There is a great deal of difference between statements regarding someone who has been convicted of a crime and someone who is merely being questioned. I wonder if their lawyers were reading the Sun when they were villifying Chris Jefferies, or the many muslims they've accused of being terrorists Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank ryan Posted February 16, 2012 Author Share Posted February 16, 2012 I do hope their lawyers aren't reading this. There is a great deal of difference between statements regarding someone who has been convicted of a crime and someone who is merely being questioned. I'm not really quaking caparo - until very recently, the gangsta tactics of the murdoch empire might've responded to my hatred of them with a story about me being a pervert or a terrorist sympathiser or an adulterer (all of which I strenuously deny) like they did with anyone who interferred with their (allegedly) criminal empire in the past - at the moment , I think they're more into damage limitation and they can go and do one. feel free to pass this on to the digger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.