|This Whole Conservative Led Government is Rotten|
and Corrupt To The Core!
- David Cameron
- Rupert Murdoch
- Andy Coulson.
Cable (supposedly unaware) that he was talking to two undercover Telegraph reporter said he was going to block the Murdoch application for BSkyB take-over. Really? No seriously, really?
- We all know how Cameron is an ex PR salesman, a spin doctor, obsessed with spin and media manipulation.
- We all know that Murdoch's News Corporation backed Cameron and the Tories to the hilt.
- Rupert Murdoch was the first visitor to Number 10 after Cameron became prime minister and that he entered and left by the back door.
- Rupert Murdoch has been back several times since, slipping in and out trying not to be seen.
- Murdoch's team are constantly in touch with Cameron's team.
- Cameron's team at number 10 refuse point blank to give details about Murdoch's visits to Downing Street, even though information about these visits is definitely in the public interest.
- David Cameron has direct links with Rupert Murdoch
- Cameron's very own media advisor, is Andy Coulson
- Andy Coulson was forced to resign as editor of Murdoch's News of the World, over the phone hacking scandal.
- Andy Coulson was then employed just a couple of months later by David Cameron.
- Approximately 13 journalists gave evidence under oath to the police, all pointing to the fact that Andy Coulson DID know about the telephone hacking
- Andy Coulson was also interviewed by the police, but he was not questioned under oath like the other journalists!
- Despite this and other evidence coming to light, the CPS ruled that there was not enough evidence to proceed with a case against Andy Coulson.
- High court papers lodged by Sienna Miller's lawyers contradict paper's insistence that a single 'rogue' journalist was involved and implicates Andy Coulson yet again.
Rupert Murdoch's propose take-over/merger bid of BSkyB is inexplicably and politically tangled up with David Cameron and the Conservative party and Conservative government.
Vince Cable the Business Secretary told two undercover Telegraph reporters that he was "waging war on Murdoch" and that he was going to block Murdoch' merger between News Corporation and BSkyB. This is undeniably a sackable offence, but because David Cameron and Nick Clegg are so weak and ineffectual, they were too scared to sack Cable, instead, bizarrely, they stripped him of responsibility for this merger and left him in his post!
In order to keep Vince Cable in his post, no less than 70 people have had to pack up their things and move office to Culture and Media Secretary Jeremy Hunt, but how impartial is Jeremy Hunt? In recent weeks, Jeremy Hunt has been overheard praising Rupert Murdoch to the hilt.
If Vince Cable was judged unable to fulfil the quasi-judicial, decision-making role in the case after expressing a bias, then in all honestly how can Jeremy Hunt fulfil the same decision making role after expressing favourable comments about Rupert Murdoch?
Pertinently, Jeremy Hunt is asked whether it would matter if Murdoch owned two TV news channels in the UK, he said;
"The important thing is not whether a particular owner owns another TV channel but to make sure you have a variety of owners with a variety of TV channels so that no one owner has a dominant position both commercially and politically.
Rather than worry about Rupert Murdoch owning another TV channel, what we should recognise is that he has probably done more to create variety and choice in British TV than any other single person because of his huge investment in setting up Sky TV, which, at one point, was losing several million pounds a day.
We would be the poorer and wouldn't be saying that British TV is the envy of the world if it hadn't been for him being prepared to take that commercial risk. We need to encourage that kind of investment."
Jeremy Hunt's own personal website describes him as follows:
"Like all good Conservatives Hunt is a cheerleader for Rupert Murdoch's contribution to the health of British television"
So it seems quite simple, how can Jeremy Hunt possibly judge this decision when he has been making comments like this?
In fact given all of this how can the Conservative party which is so closely and inexplicably involved with Rupert Murdoch and his News Corporation, and how can the Conservative led government fulfil the quasi-judicial, decision-making necessary to come to an unbiased decision?
Why was Jeremy Hunt chosen by David Cameron and Nick Clegg to take over this responsibility? Lawyers had to be consulted, yet the prime minister still went ahead with this. Jeremy Hunt is an old and very close friend of David Cameron.
Cameron and Clegg were so worried about the legal implications of moving this power to Jeremy Hunt, that they were forced to consult top lawyers.
Sir Gus O'Donnell has apparently said that he is satisfied that Jeremy Hunt has not pre-judged the proposed take-over, but how can he possibly say this? It is a matter of public concern and public confidence. The public simply will not see it like this, the public will see this as underhand and deceitful and coming right from the heart of government, from David Cameron and Nick Clegg, this episode is of fundamental importance to the integrity of the conduct of government, and Cameron and Clegg have fundamentally failed.
In order to keep Vince Cable in his job, David Cameron had to transfer 70 staff out of their offices and over to the Culture and Media secretary's offices. This goes much further than merely transferring responsibility from one minister to another, it actually involves massive changes to the very machinery of government and we are expected to believe that this has all been done to keep one man, Vince Cable in his position? Why? Why so much trouble for just one man?
What does Vince Cable actually know that scares David Cameron and Nick Clegg so much that they are going to these extraordinary lengths to keep him in his post? If he were a Tory MP he would have been sacked.
Perhaps Vince Cable was NOT exaggerating when he said he was the "nuclear option"? Perhaps he actually is the nuclear option and if he goes from government then the government will be brought down?
Cameron has said that Vince Cable's comments are inappropriate etc, if Cameron really thinks this then he has no option but to sack Vince Cable. In keeping Cable in his position, Cameron has made himself and Nick Clegg look weak and ineffectual and indecisive. Obviously Cameron and Clegg are too scared to sack Cable for fear that he will become a rallying point on the backbenches for dissent against this draconian Tory led government.
This whole affair has badly damaged the Conservative led government.
There are over 60.000 signatures lodged at the Regulator Ofcom offices by pressure group 38 Degrees, if Ofcom decide to allow this merger between News Corporation and BSkyB, Murdoch will have the monopoly on news in the UK. Now thanks to the responsibility being taken away from Cable and given to Jeremy Hunt, it looks very much like Rupert Murdoch, who has meddled countless times in the UK general elections, will get his way.
One would have to be simple if one did not wonder if this whole thing was one big set up from start to finish to oust Cable's responsibility for the merger and give it to Hunt and it was done this way in order to keep Cable in his post and thus keep Lib Dems happy.
There is something decidedly odd about this whole affair. Perhaps the whole thing was engineered in order to give Rupert Murdoch exactly what he wants, because he was promised this in return for his newspapers and Fox News giving unprecedented backing and coverage to Cameron and the Tory party during and before the general election in 2010 and if Murdoch did not get what he was promised, then he was going to cause serious problems for David Cameron's Tory led government?
If this is the case then this will not go away and neither will the Andy Coulson affair, this will when it breaks, bring this Tory government down.
This Conservative led government is corrupt and rotten to the core.