Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
privatefraser

Labour In The Pocket Of Murdoch

Recommended Posts

Apparently Murdoch hada veto on Labour's European Union policy and Blair was blabbing his mouth off to Murdoch last week about the BBC's coverage of Hurricane Katrina being full of hate and loathing for America.

What do Labour voters think of Murdoch's role in the Labour Party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh I see! You're saying Blair's in the Labour party. Interesting.

And you are saying he isnt ?

Thats like saying Stalin wasnt in the Communist Party or Hu Jintao is not in the Chinese Communist Party.

WISE UP ITS AN ELECTED DICTATORSHIP

And just as Hu Jintao is closer to any Chinese mega-mogul than he is to his party members then so is Blair.

The only difference between here and China is that we can get the basta.rds out of power.

But even that is getting difficult .

We only gave the control-freak pseudo-communists 35 % of the vote and we still couldnt budge the police-state SERIAL WARMONGERS.

If that had happened in an openly Communist state we would have laughed at the pretensions of the leader to leigitimacy.

I AM SO GLAD I CAN THINK

Edited by privatefraser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And you are saying he isnt ?

Thats like saying Stalin wasnt in the Communist Party or Hu Jintao is not in the Chinese Communist Party.

WISE UP ITS AN ELECTED DICTATORSHIP

And just as Hu Jintao is closer to any Chinese mega-mogul than he is to his party members then so is Blair.

The only difference between here and China is that we can get the basta.rds out of power.

But even that is getting difficult .

We only gave the control-freak pseudo-communists 35 % of the vote and we still couldnt budge the police-state SERIAL WARMONGERS.

If that had happened in an openly Communist state we would have laughed at the pretensions of the leader to leigitimacy.

I AM SO GLAD I CAN THINK

Lighten up privatefraser

There is no need to bite dude's head off, he replied using sarcastic humor. In that, Blair in no way what so ever represents socialist ideals that one would normaly associate with the Labour movement. He merely "used" the Labour Party as a vehicle by which to achieve political goals.

As the world has witnessed, he is prepared to make pacts with the Devil to rise to the top of the international stage, hence his association with Bush and Murdoch.

There is a conciquence of the majority of the electorate reading the Sun or as in America watching Fox News. And that is in the elected dictatorships of the western democracies there is a requirement that the electorate are "dumbed down" and thats where Murdoch comes in.

I must say I agree with alot of what you say, but I dare say your approach is off putting to those you wish to influence. I sense your frustration, in that you feel we in the so called "Western Democracies" are slipping slowly but surely into a "Totalitarian New World Order" and nobody appears to "give a f&uck"

But most people would say, it cannot happen in democracies the people would just rise up. Of course what they dont realise is in all past dictatorships, those considered to be potential leaders of resistance will be "taken out" Think Chile, think the CIA assasination of the Commander of the Chilean Armed Forces, who vowed to uphold the democratic right of the population to elect their own leader.

The so called "War on Terrorism" is in fact the first stage in stripping away of the safe guards that could stop this new world order happening.

Alas like Private Fraser of "Dads Army" your right in saying " we are all Doomed a tell ya Doooooooooooooomed"

:ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well i didnt vote for murdoch.

seems our democratic system is flawed by media giants of infuence.

after all - they hold the power to change and inform the public how they see fit.

the whole thing stinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently Murdoch hada veto on Labour's European Union policy and Blair was blabbing his mouth off to Murdoch last week about the BBC's coverage of Hurricane Katrina being full of hate and loathing for America.

What do Labour voters think of Murdoch's role in the Labour Party.

Most serious supporters left the labour party when Tony hijacked it. :(

New labour is not real Labour !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really? How can that be?

its in today's independent and Mail on Sunday

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article313482.ece

Anger over Mr Blair's comments will be heightened by a claim made in a diary kept by a former Downing Street spin doctor that Mr Murdoch was allowed to veto any change in UK policy towards Europe.

An entry in a diary kept by Lance Price, who worked for the PM between 1998 and 2000, said: "We have promised News International we won't make any changes to our Europe policy without talking to them."

But, according to today's Mail on Sunday, that diary entry was altered on instructions from the Cabinet Office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Probably the same as Conservative voters when he had a role in the Conservative Party

WMF is right in what he says, in fact you can vote for either mainstream party and you will get the same outcome. Because both parties [ the bit that's count ] have been fully bought and paid for by "Corporate Commerce" If you doubt the validity of that statement, contact the White House and ask to be put through to the Accounts Department, I'm sure they will be happy to send you a "Copy Invoice" :rolleyes:

Patriotism, religious indoctrination, and political allegiance are the chains by which they bind you.

As John Bird said on Bremner Bird and Fortune last Sunday night " I'm the governments worst nightmare, a man in a robe with a mind of his own" The character he was portraying was a High Courrt Judge....but just think about it, a double meaning perhaps.............a man in a robe with a mind of his own :rolleyes:

Dont miss it tonight 8.00pm Ch4 it's the most incisive and honest dipiction of political life today.......plus its a bloody good laugh.

Edited by Catch22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently Murdoch hada veto on Labour's European Union policy and Blair was blabbing his mouth off to Murdoch last week about the BBC's coverage of Hurricane Katrina being full of hate and loathing for America.

It's alarming that Blair was being honest for once. Sadly it's hard to disagree with his latter point, a good number of their correspondents were particularly exercised, almost ranting, as if they've finally got one over on Bush and that now the American people will finally see the light and realise what an incompetent dipstip that they have as their president.

They seemed more concerned about the personal impact on Dubya than the actual victims or relief on the ground. It didn't take long until we were hearing that if only the US had ratified Kyoto none of this would have happened, they brought it on themselves, don't you see. And it's good that half the oil production and refineries are knocked out, those knuckleheads deserve to pay the earth for their gas as they don't see the consequences of their actions on the climate. If only we hadn't gone to war we'd have the troops on the ground, as if the 82nd Airborne Division were little more than Dad's Army. etc, etc, etc.

There was talk on here recently about the importance of being magnanimous in the aftermath of an inevitable crash, I don't think we've got much to learn from the Beeb in these matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm now a Labour supporter: I did vote for the Tories in 1979 and was rewarded with two years unemployment -- something I would wish on no one.

Blair did hijack the party, but to be fair they wouldn't have got back in otherwise. Partly because of the change in society over the last 30 years (in the 70s you only bought 'on tick' if you really had to, for example).

Considering we have such an ancient democracy (it stretches all the way back to the 1920s when women got the vote) it is pretty poor. No democratic system is perfect, but there is something to be said for a system that links a vote to an individual. However, consider if I lived in High Wycombe -- would my vote have any weight there? And conversly consider a Tory voter living somewhere in the North, er, let me think; I know, Scotland! :), would their vote mean anything? The net effect is there are a handful of 'marginal constituencies' that determine elections. Is that good for democracy?

I must admit, while I don't think Blair's policies are best for this country he is an amazing politician. He normally uses his focus groups to determine policy and goes which way the wind blows. But then he is pressured by the US to support them over Iraq (ok, they don't admit this, but what other reason is there?) and has stubbornly defended the indefensible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
its in today's independent and Mail on Sunday

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article313482.ece

Anger over Mr Blair's comments will be heightened by a claim made in a diary kept by a former Downing Street spin doctor that Mr Murdoch was allowed to veto any change in UK policy towards Europe.

An entry in a diary kept by Lance Price, who worked for the PM between 1998 and 2000, said: "We have promised News International we won't make any changes to our Europe policy without talking to them."

But, according to today's Mail on Sunday, that diary entry was altered on instructions from the Cabinet Office.

On reading the linked article, it would appear the "Puppeteers" have sensed the electoral beast is awakening from its slumber. I mean no matter how dumb the electorate is, there is only so mush spin one can put on a lie. And maybe the time has come to put the "NuLabour Marionette" back in the box, and bring out the "NuConservative Marionette"

But either way one things for sure Murdoch will still be on the scene "selling" the Coporates chosen maronette to the "Masses" :angry:

Your TV is in reality a Weapon of Mass Deception

Edited by Catch22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Charlie The Tramp

Blair, this man makes Richard Nixon look like a honest second hand car salesman.

Downing Street drowns in its own double dealing

10:05am 18th September 2005

Lance Price's account of life in Downing Street is a devastating insight into New Labour at its worst. The deliberate lying, the casual trashing of Ministers deemed 'off message', the attempts to hide inept governance behind meaningless soundbites dreamt up simply to protect Blair's image.

And what of the man who once insisted he was a regular sort of guy?

Price portrays Blair as a spiteful individual, launching into a foul-mouthed tirade against a senior Catholic cleric who dares question his wisdom. And Blair, Price makes clear, is at the very heart of a mendacious culture of deception and spin.

The authority of this portrait is greater because the author remains a supporter of the Government. Yet Price argues that the public has a right to know the manner and processes of a Government working in its name. In this, he is surely correct.

At the same time, it is only fair to observe that, since the departure of Alastair Campbell from No 10, there has been genuine effort to move on from the shifty stunts and poisonous briefings that characterised his reign.

But old habits die hard. We now learn that a concerted operation to discredit Price has been launched by Downing Street. The circular argument that will be proffered is that, as the author admits in his book to lying on behalf of the Prime Minister, then nothing he now says can be credible. Even for an administration that has made an art form of dissembling, this takes some beating.

And what of Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O'Donnell's assertion that publication of the book "betrays the trust placed in Price"? Has not Cherie Blair made considerable sums lecturing on the back of her husband's job? When Blair leaves office, can she be trusted not to fill her boots courtesy of intimate knowledge gained in her taxpayer-funded time at No 10?

And what of Campbell, who has admitted keeping a diary? Price records his former boss as saying: "Life is on the record." Will he respect that "trust" and will Sir Gus then be so quick to cry foul?

Judging by the standards of double-dealing and duplicity laid bare today, this must be doubtful.

The silence of Mrs Blair

Last weekend Downing Street was asked by this newspaper on three occasions whether Cherie Blair had paid VAT on pearls she purchased in China. On each occasion No 10 refused to answer.

The same question was posed yesterday. Again, reply came there none.

The law is specific on duty payable on goods brought into Britain from abroad. No one, whatever their fame or fortune, is exempt - witness the £3,500 levied on Coleen McLoughlin, fianceè of footballer Wayne Rooney, when she brought home booty from a New York shopping trip.

If Mrs Blair has failed to pay the required duty on her Chinese jewellery then Customs and Excise should say what action they propose to take.

Surely, as a barrister herself, Mrs Blair would be the first to argue that not even the wife of the Prime Minister is exempt from the law of the land?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pioneer31

Why is Cherie Blair such a tight fisted cow? She earns truck loads, is married to someone who earns truck loads (basic salary plus endless perks and freebies plus property portfolio) yet I heard a report a while back about her buying activity on Ebay.

I wouldn't be surprised to find her sniffing round Oxfam - depriving genuine poor people from grabbing the bargains.

She should be shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest The dude
It's alarming that Blair was being honest for once. Sadly it's hard to disagree with his latter point, a good number of their correspondents were particularly exercised, almost ranting, as if they've finally got one over on Bush and that now the American people will finally see the light and realise what an incompetent dipstip that they have as their president.

They seemed more concerned about the personal impact on Dubya than the actual victims or relief on the ground. It didn't take long until we were hearing that if only the US had ratified Kyoto none of this would have happened, they brought it on themselves, don't you see. And it's good that half the oil production and refineries are knocked out, those knuckleheads deserve to pay the earth for their gas as they don't see the consequences of their actions on the climate. If only we hadn't gone to war we'd have the troops on the ground, as if the 82nd Airborne Division were little more than Dad's Army. etc, etc, etc.

There was talk on here recently about the importance of being magnanimous in the aftermath of an inevitable crash, I don't think we've got much to learn from the Beeb in these matters.

"It's alarming that Blair was being honest for once. Sadly it's hard to disagree with his latter point, a good number of their correspondents were particularly exercised, almost ranting, as if they've finally got one over on Bush and that now the American people will finally see the light and realise what an incompetent dipstip that they have as their president"

If that's what you think then fair be it. However, I did not see this so called BBC bias at all. Just straight forward reporting of the facts. Those black people who got left behind - what were they - hired actors?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If that's what you think then fair be it. However, I did not see this so called BBC bias at all. Just straight forward reporting of the facts.  Those black people who got left behind - what were they - hired actors?

Who, the correspondents? Maybe, they put in quite a performance considering they were either sitting in studios in Washington or London never having been to New Orleans, yet them seem to know exactly what was happening and who was to blame, quite amazing really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest The dude
Who, the correspondents? Maybe, they put in quite a performance considering they were either sitting in studios in Washington or London never having been to New Orleans, yet them seem to know exactly what was happening and who was to blame, quite amazing really.

I think you have misunderstood my point........it's not your fault - mine entirely. My point was: were those people who were left behind in the wake of Katrina ( predominately black people but more importantly POOR people), were they a fiction of my imagination?.....was it a set up?...'cos what I think I saw were pictures of Poor people left behind and a breakdown in law and order. Are you saying that didn't happen?....or have I just witnessed the sequal to 'Wag the Dog'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 301 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.