Oh please please.... Piers Morgan questioned over phone hack
Discussion
REALIST123 said:
Other than Milly Dowler, who else was a real 'victim'?
Frankly, the politicians and celebrities got a little more of what they normally seek out, just the bits they would rather keep secret.
As for Royal aides and civil servants, I can't think what they would keep secret that might be of any interest. Hardly 'victims'.
Indeed - and it should be remembered that Milly Dowler was the victim of a rather more serious crime than just having her phone hacked. It's certainly distasteful and morally bankrupt, but hardly the crime of the century.Frankly, the politicians and celebrities got a little more of what they normally seek out, just the bits they would rather keep secret.
As for Royal aides and civil servants, I can't think what they would keep secret that might be of any interest. Hardly 'victims'.
People have always desired salacious gossip masquerading as news. Once upon a time these titbits of celeb scandal were gleaned from paid informants (friends and family), now (well until recently at least) the information comes from voicemails and other digital media (in the same way that government gets it, but that's another thread).
Still, I can't stand Morgan, so if he does see the inside of a court over this, I won't be unhappy.
MocMocaMoc said:
Personally, I'd accept a lawless UK for 24 hours if they diverted all resource towards jailing that t*rd-headed ar*e licking greasey f*ck knuckle gobsh*te.
I actually cant put into words how much I hate that man. He's a ladder climbing, witless sycophant who pollutes out media in every form.
I kept track of his GQ interviews for a long while - counting how many started with "I really hated Celebrity-X, but after spending this last few seconds with them, I've really grown to love them so hard I want to bum them stiff" (words to that effect)
Pointless scum. Jail is too good. Make him sign the Sex Offenders register, too.
Are you a diplomat by any chanceI actually cant put into words how much I hate that man. He's a ladder climbing, witless sycophant who pollutes out media in every form.
I kept track of his GQ interviews for a long while - counting how many started with "I really hated Celebrity-X, but after spending this last few seconds with them, I've really grown to love them so hard I want to bum them stiff" (words to that effect)
Pointless scum. Jail is too good. Make him sign the Sex Offenders register, too.
pork911 said:
you honestly think any of your communications are private?
nope, almost none of it.however, to 'listen in' on phone calls takes a lot more effort/access/knowledge than using default voicemail passwords.
that said, E-mail is a whole other story.....
one of the downsides to living in EU land is that the EU governments will never allow a comms system that they cannot intercept, for example, GSM security was massively watered down (to the point you can crack the coding on the fly).
you only have to look at the fun and games from the Snowden leaks to realise just how much snooping is going on all the time.
REALIST123 said:
Other than Milly Dowler, who else was a real 'victim'?
Frankly, the politicians and celebrities got a little more of what they normally seek out, just the bits they would rather keep secret.
As for Royal aides and civil servants, I can't think what they would keep secret that might be of any interest. Hardly 'victims'.
It's not about the individuals but the process of doing what was done.Frankly, the politicians and celebrities got a little more of what they normally seek out, just the bits they would rather keep secret.
As for Royal aides and civil servants, I can't think what they would keep secret that might be of any interest. Hardly 'victims'.
The law doesn't (and shouldn't) use fame or lack of it to distinguish between those whose phones have been hacked. Just because a celebrity that you might not like or is a bit of a tosser has had their phone hacked has as much right to privacy as anybody else and the law must apply equally.
Many celebrities will use the media for their own ends when it suits them but not like it when the media uses them for their own ends but that isn't what this is all about. It's about making a deliberate attempt to access private information.
You can't have one law for the well known and another for the rest of us (although there are times when it seems like we do have this!)
simoid said:
Might as well include those thefts where people are too stupid to lock their doors, too. That'll save some police resources.
To be honest, I'd be for that. It takes a right idiot to leave their property or go to bed without securing their house. A good burglary might knock some sense into them.The use of the word hacking does seem to imply that there is some element of technical capability which had to be exercised to do this, instead of just a bunch of inept chancers. Somehow I suspect the public opinion swingometer might move if the ease of doing this stuff was well known. More like eavesdropping than hacking.
Having said that, anything which gets Moron out of the public eye is good use of resources.
Having said that, anything which gets Moron out of the public eye is good use of resources.
eldar said:
And all those idiots that drive old cars or BMWs, because they are so easy to steal?
Errr, no. Driving an old car or BMW is in no way like not locking a house.E.g.
"Why do you drive an Austin A90 Atlantic?"
"Because it invokes a sense of nostalgia, I enjoy the driving experience and am rather taken by its looks."
"Why don't you lock your house?"
"Because it reminds of the way in which my grandfather would never secure his property, I enjoy the risk of being an easy target and the sound of grinding locks displeases me."
OR...
"Unfortunately my Jaguar Mk. VII was an easy target because I had to leave it at the roadside while my garage was being prepared."
"Unfortunately my house was ransacked because I don't have the mental ability to consider taking basic precautions to keep out intruders, so I thought I should waste the time and resources of the law by having them investigate something that occurred largely because I'm thick."
Edited by ClassicMotorNut on Friday 14th February 22:00
of a man isn't technically a crime. Hiwever, it's hard to be the smug Scuffers said:
one of the downsides to living in EU land is that the EU governments will never allow a comms system that they cannot intercept, for example, GSM security was massively watered down (to the point you can crack the coding on the fly).
Yes, but when it was developed about 30 years ago it was pretty useful. It was certainly massively superior to analogue security.3G and LTE are a significant step forward again.
All the air interface security in the world isn't a lot of use if the people with black helicopters can pull the ip traffic off the core network.
ClassicMotorNut said:
simoid said:
Might as well include those thefts where people are too stupid to lock their doors, too. That'll save some police resources.
To be honest, I'd be for that. It takes a right idiot to leave their property or go to bed without securing their house. A good burglary might knock some sense into them.Not much different to leaving your voice mail with the standard security number.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff