British Hillsborough football fans’ deaths, Thatcher, Murdoch guilty


This video from Britain says about itself:

‘We told you The Sun lied‘: Hillsborough 96 families

27 April 2016

As the Murdoch press’ front pages today ignore the Hillsborough verdict,

including the Times, supposedly the ‘quality’ paper of the Murdoch empire

the families of the 96 said yesterday ‘we told you they lied’, ‘they’ being The Sun, the government and the police. The families believe the lies deprived the memory of their loved ones, who were portrayed as scum, of justice. That justice came yesterday after 27 years of campaigning and a two-year inquest with more than 800 witnesses that was the longest jury hearing in British legal history. The Sun apologised for their 1989 infamous editorial ‘The Truth’ in 2012. As did BoJo [London Conservative Mayor Boris Johnson] in the same year for his 2004 editorial in the Spectator. The piece shows how ingrained the image of Liverpool fans as ‘tanked-up yobs’, coined by Sir Bernard Ingham, Margaret Thatcher‘s former press secretary, was in the establishment:

“Liverpool is a handsome city with a tribal sense of community. A combination of economic misfortune – its docks were, fundamentally, on the wrong side of England when Britain entered what is now the European Union – and an excessive predilection for welfarism have created a peculiar, and deeply unattractive, psyche among many Liverpudlians. They see themselves whenever possible as victims, and resent their victim status; yet at the same time they wallow in it.

Part of this flawed psychological state is that they cannot accept that they might have made any contribution to their misfortunes, but seek rather to blame someone else for it, thereby deepening their sense of shared tribal grievance against the rest of society. The deaths of more than 50 Liverpool football supporters at Hillsborough in 1989 was undeniably a greater tragedy than the single death, however horrible, of Mr Bigley; but that is no excuse for Liverpool’s failure to acknowledge, even to this day, the part played in the disaster by drunken fans at the back of the crowd who mindlessly tried to fight their way into the ground that Saturday afternoon. The police became a convenient scapegoat, and the Sun newspaper a whipping-boy for daring, albeit in a tasteless fashion, to hint at the wider causes of the incident.”

That prevailing image of the victims could explain why it took so long to identify the real culprits, as Peter Fahy, former Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police says “The Taylor Report way back in 1989, identified a lot of the failings, which have been confirmed in the hearing today.” Margaret Aspinall who lost her son James in the disaster focused on how much the truth was suppressed all these years and that ‘a lot of things that came out in the past few weeks I didn’t know myself.’

From daily The Morning Star in Britain:

Justice at last

CROWN Prosecution Service lawyers have the responsibility now to take appropriate action after the Hillsborough disaster inquest jury decisions.

While the families of the 96 dead Liverpool FC fans see the culmination of their determined campaign as “justice at last,” the Establishment’s stringing out of this process for 27 years amounts to justice delayed and frustrated.

Some campaigners have not lived to see this day. Senior police have put families through hell by using delaying tactics to deny an undeniable truth.

When senior police officers fail to carry out their duties, with fatal consequences, there must be a legal reckoning.

But the Hillsborough families were the victims of a conspiracy in which police, the Murdoch media and politicians fed each other lies to be repeated as widely as possible to give the false impression that the fans’ behaviour contributed to the tragedy.

Football fans were viewed by Margaret Thatcher’s government as savages to be penned in behind steel fences, preventing their evacuation during overcrowding.

They were traduced in Murdoch’s Scum [Sun] as being drunken yobbos, forcing their way onto the terraces, robbing the dead and urinating on police, thus contributing to a general image of savagery.

Scum editor Kelvin MacKenzie claimed that these allegations emanated from the police.

Perhaps the CPS should give thought to conspiracy charges being laid against those it believes may have engaged in joint enterprise to besmirch the names of 96 dead LFC supporters and their fellow fans.

A full 27 years after the event, the inquest into the Hillsborough disaster concluded that 96 Liverpool Football Club supporters, crushed to death on April 15, 1989, were unlawfully killed. The verdict in the longest jury case in British legal history vindicates the extraordinary campaign by the families, friends and supporters of those killed, injured and traumatized: here.

Hillsborough inquest: legal system a key part of establishment that failed families for years. The inquest delivered the basic justice people had waited 27 years for – but a detached judge and police repetition of old, putrid claims prolonged the nightmare: here.

British police, not football fans, guilty of Hillsborough deaths


This video from England says about itself:

Hillsborough Families sing after unlawful killing conclusion

26 April 2016

Ninety-six football fans who died as a result of a crush in the 1989 Hillsborough disaster were unlawfully killed, the inquests have concluded.

The jury decided the match commander [Police] Chief Superintendent David Duckenfield’s actions amounted to “gross negligence” due to a breach of his duty of care to fans.

Families of the victims showed their relief outside court by singing the Liverpool football club anthem, “You’ll Never Walk Alone“.

From Who Ate All The Pies in Britain:

Justice At Long Last: Inquest Jury Rules 96 Liverpool Fans Were ‘Unlawfully Killed’ At Hillsborough In 1989

Chris Wright

26th, April 2016

It’s taken 27 long years of acute pain and withering strife, but today the inquests have concluded that 96 Liverpool fans were “unlawfully killed” at Hillsborough on 15th April, 1989.

The jurors determined that the police were guilty of gross negligence by a 7-2 majority, while also ruling that the behaviour of the Liverpool fans did not contribute to the deaths.

The news comes as especially blessed relief to the Hillsborough families and campaigners, who have been relentless in their pursuit of the truth ever since that tragic day. After almost 30 years of lies and smears, it’s over. It took far too long but they’ve finally scaled the mountain. Justice for the 96 at long, long last.

Now, as the world can finally move on, there’s one national newspaper which certainly owes the people of Liverpool an apology

Rupert Murdoch's Sun's lies on Hillsborough

Don’t hold your breath.

So, police were guilty, this decision says. However, police didn’t work in a vacuüm. They worked in a context of Margaret Thatcher‘s Conservative government, and of the establishment, including Rupert Murdoch and his Sun daily.

The British Crown Prosecution Service will now consider the evidence and decide whether any individual or organisation should face criminal prosecution. Margaret Thatcher is dead, and cannot be prosecuted any more. Some of her ministers are still alive.

Rupert Murdoch is still, sort of, ‘undead’. So, in theory, he might be prosecuted. However, he was not prosecuted for his phone hacking, his burglary, his warmongering, his bribing of police, etc. etc. either. So, unfortunately, I have to say ‘Don’t hold your breath’ as well.

Murdoch papers Sun and Times bury Hillsborough victims’ vindication on back pages: here.

Donald Trump-Rupert Murdoch media update


This United States parody video says about itself:

24 January 2016

Sarah Palin (Tina Fey) endorses Donald Trump (Darrell Hammond) for president at an Iowa campaign stop.

By Christina Wilkie, National Political Reporter, The Huffington Post in the USA:

Donald Trump Has An Ace To Play Against Fox News

The GOP front-runner has information that could damage the cable news network if it were to be made public.

04/03/2016 11:22 pm ET | Updated 8 hours ago

When Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump launched a crusade against Fox News and its star anchor, Megyn Kelly, last summer, many political insiders saw the move as the beginning of the end of Trump’s upstart campaign.

Why would anyone seeking the Republican presidential nomination attack a network that reaches huge swaths of the Republican primary electorate?

One answer is that Trump was angry with Kelly and Fox News after the anchor asked him a tough question during a Republican presidential debate in August.

But in a newly published article Sunday in New York Magazine, author and journalist Gabriel Sherman reveals how Trump came to possess ultra-insider information about Fox News and its founder, Roger Ailes, that could be damaging if it were ever to be made public.

It’s this leverage, Sherman writes, that has so far discouraged Fox News from launching an all-out war on Trump.

Below is an excerpt from Sherman’s piece:

It was also thanks to some information he had gathered that Trump was able to do something that no other Republican has done before: take on Fox News. An odd bit of coincidence had given him a card to play against Fox founder Roger Ailes. In 2014, I published a biography of Ailes, which upset the famously paranoid executive. Several months before it landed in stores, Ailes fired his longtime PR adviser Brian Lewis, accusing him of being a source. During Lewis’s severance negotiations, Lewis hired Judd Burstein, a powerhouse litigator, and claimed he had “bombs” that would destroy Ailes and Fox News. That’s when Trump got involved.

“When Roger was having problems, he didn’t call 97 people, he called me,” Trump said. Burstein, it turned out, had worked for Trump briefly in the ’90s, and Ailes asked Trump to mediate. Trump ran the negotiations out of his office at Trump Tower. “Roger [Ailes] had lawyers, very expensive lawyers, and they couldn’t do anything. I solved the problem.”  Fox paid Lewis millions to go away quietly, and Trump, I’m told, learned everything Lewis had planned to leak. If Ailes ever truly went to war against Trump, Trump would have the arsenal to launch a retaliatory strike.

Sherman’s reporting may also help to explain why Trump was so willing to drop out of a major Fox News debate in Iowa in January, a decision that might have hobbled the campaign of a typical GOP candidate.

In March, Trump participated in a Fox News debate in Detroit, where he flagrantly violated the debate rules by consulting with his campaign manager during a commercial break. Fox did not penalize the Trump campaign.

A spokeswoman for the Trump campaign declined to comment on Sherman’s report.

Rupert Murdoch media whip up racism


This video, recorded in England, says about itself:

Rochdale imam murder-in-playground suspect arrested

19 February 2016

Police arrested a suspect for murder in Rochdale, Friday, after an imam died in hospital after being found bleeding with a fatal head injury in a school playground on Thursday evening.

The ‘low brow’ sections of the Rupert Murdoch empire, like British daily The Sun, are notorious for whipping up racism.

London daily The Times is a ‘high brow’ part of the Murdoch empire. But they turn out to be not really any better.

By Lamiat Sabin in Britain:

Top cop calls for Times apology

Monday 22nd February 2016

A TOP police chief demanded yesterday that The Times newspaper immediately apologise for its “offensive” linking of the murder of a Muslim man to child sex grooming.

Greater Manchester Police (GMP) chief constable Ian Hopkins sent an open letter to the newspaper on Saturday saying he is “appalled” over its headline “imam beaten to death in sex grooming town.”

The paper printed the line above a story of the death of Jalal Uddin, 56, who was found covered in blood after suffering injuries to his head last Thursday.

Mr Uddin is believed to have taken a shortcut home from a friend’s house in Rochdale at about 9pm on Wednesday.

A 31-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of murder and released without charge.

Mr Hopkins wrote: “The headline has no relevance to the horrific murder of a former imam in Rochdale … I have received much feedback about the outrage that the article has caused.

“Your headline and its irrelevance to this case has the potential to cause community tension. It is also offensive to the thousands of peaceful law abiding Muslims and non-Muslims living in Rochdale, who are shocked by this murder.”

GMP has “not ruled out” that the attack was racially motivated, he continued.

Critics have urged people to report the newspaper to the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso). The Times later changed “sex grooming town” to “Rochdale” in its online version.

Muslim Council of Britain secretary-general Dr Shuja Shafi said: “We would urge the community to be vigilant and offer support whilst travelling.”

The Sun‘s Kelvin Mackenzie sparks 800 complaints to press regulator after ‘completely unacceptable’ attack on Muslim journalist. Channel 4 News brands 69-year-old’s comments ‘offensive, completely unacceptable and arguably tantamount to inciting religious and even racial hatred’: here.

After Murdoch-Blair quarrel, Murdoch-Trump quarrel


This video from the British Parliament says about itself:

Leveson Inquiry: Rupert Murdoch endorsed Tony Blair after getting all he could from him

25 April 2012

The News International proprietor admits that he only sanctioned Sun approval of Tony Blair after he had gotten all the concessions he could get from him.

Rupert Murdoch and fellow Big Media billionaire Silvio Berlusconi used to be buddies. That is, until Rupert and Silvio started to quarrel about a loot of lots of money

Rupert Murdoch and conservative Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott used to be buddies. That is, until Rupert helped to sack Tony.

Rupert Murdoch and British Labour Blairite Prime Minister Tony Blair used to be buddies. Tony is the godfather of Rupert‘s children. That is, until Tony had an affair with Rupert’s wife.

Rupert Murdoch and United States Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump used to be buddies. That is, until now …

By Paddy McGuffin in Britain:

Take advantage of the Fox-Trump fallout now

Saturday 30th January 2016

IT’S always hard to break up with a loved-one …

We’ve all seen, and in many cases been in, those relationships whereby everyone but the individual in question knows that they’re on a one-way trip to deceit, destitution and/or misery.

Yet to point it out is anathema and invariably leads to rifts on both sides.

The quandary therefore, when things inevitably go hideously, irrevocably wrong, is which individual to side with, if any, and whether to take the exalted higher ground or spell out some desperately needed home truths.

Happily this is not the case this week, when both spurned lovers are as loathsome as each other and mutually assured destruction is the best option for the planet.

No, I’m not talking about George Osborne and Google, who would never let a tiny thing like billions of pounds in tax avoidance get in the way of their cosy relationship.

I refer of course, to the rift betwixt Donald Trump and Fox News.

Let us just sit back and enjoy that for a moment …

Even the most favourably starred relationships hit their rocky periods. And none more so than when Trump is involved.

The presidential candidate for the lacking in thought has recently taken the “News” station to task and pulled out of a scheduled debate, complaining that its female anchor was disrespectful and biased … I know! This is Fox News we’re talking about!

The problem, apparently, was that he believes they were biased AGAINST him for a change.

The row ensued after said female anchor raised the use of “pig,” “dog” and several less than chivalrous epithets by Trump during the course of his presidential campaign to attack his female opponents for the Republican candidacy.

Now as we all know, politics is a filthy business and if you want to get involved you had best grow a thick skin and hold your nose, but even by the usual standards of vicious back-biting, slanderous misrepresentation and virulent personal abuse Trump has sunk to new depths.

When this issue was aired in a recent live debate by Fox host Megyn Kelly, who asked quite reasonably if this was the kind of language a wannabe president should be using, Trump spluttered and backtracked before saying off-air that: “She had blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her whatever.”

This has widely been perceived as an attempt to claim that Kelly was menstruating and therefore, in Trump’s view, hormonally imbalanced.

Crass and pathetic as this claim is it is highly instructive and tells us two things.

Not only is Trump so patently emotionally and intellectually stunted that he is unable to say the word “vagina” but he has also apparently confused natural bodily changes coinciding with the cycle of the moon with the Ebola virus.

He also, hilariously, claimed that all Fox was interested in was getting money from his appearances, which is no doubt true but coming from the rapaciously capitalistic Trump went right off the end of the irony scale.

Fox went in to bat for their beleaguered anchor, because it’s all right for them to denigrate women and minorities but not when it comes back at them.

A Network spokesman said, and I quote, “We can’t give into terrorisations of any of our employees.”

Showing that he was a total stranger not just to the English language but also its concept.

“Capitulating to politicians’ ultimatums about a debate moderator (Kelly) violates all journalistic standards,” he added.

Which raises a number of questions, but principally, since when did Fox ever adhere to “journalistic standards?”

It never stopped them in the past when they were spoon-feeding made up shit to a gullible public in support of the ongoing “War on Terror” which was largely in their heads.

Lying through their scarily perfect teeth to back up a lame duck president who had no clue what he was doing and led the world into disaster was, likewise, apparently not a problem for their much-vaunted, newly discovered “journalistic standards.”

That’s fine, as long as he’s not black.

Basically the Fox statement can be read: “Say what you want about the Muslims, immigrants and Mexicans but criticise one of us and you’re spoiling for a fight.”

Sadly this spat will not last, so I for one am determined to make the most out of it while I can.

Ah, schadenfreude! It truly is the gift that keeps on giving.

The only way it could get any better is if Tony Blair decided to act as peace maker and he probably will — if the price is right.