You are hereBlogs / Michael Collins's blog / Rupert Watch, Lord Justice Damns Inquiry

Rupert Watch, Lord Justice Damns Inquiry


By Michael Collins - Posted on 30 May 2012

By Michael Collins


(Washington, 2/30/2012)  At the end of Monday's Leveson Inquiry with Tony Blair on the stand, Lord Justice Leveson sent the credibility of the effort's summary findings straight to Hell.  After Blair's pressured presentation and an interruption by a protester who called Blair a war criminal, Leveson began an odd exchange with the former Prime Minister.  It began with this request to Blair:

Lord Justice Leveson:

2 So whatever assistance you can give, who have
3 thought about how you change things for the future, I'd
4 be very interested. Let me give you some potential
5 issues.  (May 28 transcript page 38)

If things had ended there, this could be seen as a modest invitation, one Leveson might have offered any number of witnesses as a general courtesy.  But the justice was not finished.  He outlined specific issues covering five pages of transcript.

This was no a casual request.  We witnessed the supposedly objective judge of press excesses recruiting a former politician who had just spent several hours intermittently bemoaning to Queen's Counsel (QC) Robert Jay just how difficult it was for him to deal with the press.

During previous testimony, QC Jay had outlined events and actions suggesting that Blair traded regulatory favors for editorial support by the Murdoch publications.  Also, Blair testified that his wife had initiated thirty separate legal actions (of varying degree) due to what Mrs. Blair saw as abusive press coverage aimed at her.

Nevertheless, Blair was asked to suggest an independent regulatory authority to provide "redress" for victims of press excesses.  He was asked to suggest how such a regulatory body would be structured and the types of people who might man it to make sure the press doesn't harm public figures.

Leveson mentioned the need for "prior notification" as a key function of the independent regulatory body. In this context, the justice was referring to stories with a set of tough allegations that could be run by the subjects prior to publication.

Lord Justice Leveson:

10 ... One
11 possibility might be to say there is some mechanism
12 within the regulatory regime that allows the press to
13 say, "Look, we have this story, we don't feel we ought
14 to notify the subject of it for these reasons: he'll
15 destroy the evidence", or whatever -- it doesn't matter
16 -- and to get a view.  (Transcript pages 39 - 40)

Prior to Leveson initiating the extended colloquy, Queen's Counsel Robert Jay had examined Blair on specific topics.  For example, Jay outlined a set of events and statements suggesting that Blair had exchanged regulatory favor in return for political support. Jay even asked the former Prime Minister if some of his actions were to "curry favor" with Murdoch.

In the past, Jay has saved his best evidence and most pointed questions until the end of testimony.   But Monday, Leveson simply cut him off and began his extended exchange with Blair.  Then the justice abruptly ended the hearing without asking Jay if there were any more questions.

Leveson extended the offer of collaboration to Blair despite his stated hostility to the press, the litigious impulses of Mrs. Blair for perceived affronts, and Blair's close personal relationship with Murdoch.

Did it occur to Lord Justice Leveson that by offering Blair special input he was providing special favor to the man whose newspapers had committed the atrocious, illegal acts that inspired the hearings in the first place?

Who will take any findings from Leveson's efforts seriously?

In particular, who can take any findings regarding the influence of the media on politics seriously as it covers the Blair years in power?

What moved Leveson to this act of self-sabotage?

Is he a "fit and proper" head of the inquiry?

END

See, Help me decide future of press, Leveson asks Blair, Oliver Wright, The Independent, May 29, 2012 and the excellent comment by Independent readers.

This article may be reproduced with attribution of authorship and a link to this article.

The Money Party Rupert Watch series

Tags

With so many inquiries and investigations of corrupt,criminal, class politicians, War criminals, it reveals that the WESTERN LEGAL SYSTEMS have become totalitarian, Fascist and corrupt, protecting their own despots, Warmongering thugs, while going after truthtellers, whistleblowers, confirming the Orwellian, totalitarian class principle and the corrupt class hierarchies where Western Fascist elites have entrenched themselves in ENDLESS COVERUPS, while using the Law to promoted EASY FASCISM, RADICAL TOTALITARIANISM.    Western Fascism is going gobal and it is going to take a GLOBAL REVOLT against ALL CLASS PARTIES ALL CASS POLITICIANS to end this Nazism:


Divided British Court Upholds Extradition of WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange to Sweden (Video)


http://www.democracynow.org/2012/5/30/divided_british_court_upholds_extradition_of


EXCERPT:


"GLENN GREENWALD: I think it’s difficult to have expected any other outcome. Remember Julian Assange is one of the people most hated by Western governments because of the transparency that he brought, and typically, unfortunately, judicial branches in the United States and in the United Kingdom do the opposite of what they’re intended to do, which is they protect institutional power and help to punish and deprive the rights of those who are most scorned. And so, I would have been most shocked had the court ruled in favor of Assange, even though as the two dissenting judges on the high court pointed out, the argument of Sweden and those advocating extradition is directly and anathetical to what the statute says. No one thinks that a prosecutor is a judicial authority. He has not been charged with a crime, and therefore, there is no court or judge seeking his extradition. It’s purely a prosecutor. But the law in these cases typically is not what governs. What governs are political considerations and the views of the party. And so absence of some unexpected event—-highly unexpected event—-at some point in the near future, it is likely he will be extradited to Sweden...."


CLASS LAWS ARE ALWAYS EXCLUSIVE, SELECTIVE, DUPLICITOUS AND CORRUPT DEGENERATING INTO THE RULE OF FASCISM/TOTALITARIANISM, FINALLY EXCLUDING ITS OWN LAWS FOR DICTATORSHIP.   I WONDER WHAT OBAMA'S DAUGHTERS WOUL SAY TO HIM WHEN THEY FIND OUT HE IS EXECUTING YOUNG GIRLS AND CALLING THEM "MILITANTS", LYING ABOUT CAREFUL PROCEDUES IN PLACE AND COMMITTING WAR CRIMES


 


Obama rejects the KING indictment that the U.S. IS THE GREATEST PURVEYOR OF VIOLENCE AND WAR, instead embracing Empire and corrupt LEGAL STANDARDS where class politicians are involved in massive conspiracies to hide their criminality, their totalitarianism, fascism, going global.  Glenn Greenwald discusses, in the same way Sibel Edmonds in CLASSIFIED WOMAN, of massive institutional collusion between totalitaian judges who appease the Executve Fascim, Fuherer princple, and corrupt Federal Judges who enable "RADICAL" TOTALITARIANISM. 


With Global Spotlight on Assange Case, Bradley Manning Marks 2 Years Behind Bars (Video)


http://www.democracynow.org/2012/5/30/with_global_spotlight_on_assange_case


Excerpt:


"GLENN GREENWALD: I think it is so important to remember that what Bradley Manning is alleged to have done, what Wikileaks did, was an act of incredible nobility, bringing immense amounts of transparency to the U.S. government and its war actions, ones that are usually shrouded in complete secrecy — a real threat to democracy...


And I think it is really important to realize how grave of a threat it would be to press freedom and transparency if the Obama administration succeeds in indicting Julian Assange and extraditing him to the United States, forcing him to stand trial under espionage charges. And how it is incumbent upon everybody who believes in transparency and press freedoms to put aside whatever personal feelings you might have about Julian Assange and his personality or Bradley Manning and stand for this critical cause and not allow the Obama administration to do this...."


OBAMA, DEMOCRATS, ALL CLASS PARTIES AROUND THE WORLD ARE LINKED TO WESTERN FASCISM, including the parallel deformed Arab dictatorships, with some supported b OBAMA, while others are overthrown through Western aggression.


 


These corrupt class politicians, Obama included, have become comfortable  with their "EASY", FASCISM.   The only way this degeneration into War and Totalitarianism will end, globally, is for all social movements, especially the civil rights movement and African Americans is to realize that Obama's Fascism enables also a parallel deformed outcome, namely racism, whose many despotic forms can only be ended by taking social power, social control, over the means of production, to produce universal human rights, and finally PROSECUTE WESTERN FASCISM IN ALL LATE CAPTALIST REGIMES:


Glenn Greenwald: Obama’s Secret Kill List "The Most Radical Power a Government Can Seize" (video)


http://www.democracynow.org/2012/5/30/glenn_greenwald_obamas_secret_kill_list


excerpt:


"GLENN GREENWALD: Well we, of course don’t imply that the President of the United States believes that he has the power to order people to killed — assasinated — in total secrecy, without any due process, without transparency or oversight of any kind. I really do believe it’s literally the most radical power that a government and a President can seize, and yet the Obama administration has seized this power and exercised it aggressively with very little controversy. What the New York Times article does is it adds some important, though very disturbing details. Probably the most disturbing of which is that one of the reasons why the Obama administration runs around claiming that the casualties of civilians are so low from their drone attacks, which everyone knows is false, is because they have redefined what a militant is. A militant in the eyes of the Obama administration formally means any male of fighting age, presumably 18 to 40, who is in a strike zone of a missile. So, if the U.S. shoots a missile or detonates a bomb by drone or aircraft and kills eight or a dozen or two dozen people without even knowing whom they have killed or anything about them, they will immediately label any male of a certain age a militant by virtue of their proximity to that scene.


 


What the New York Times article said, was that the rationale for this is that they believe that anybody who is even near a terrorist or any terrorist activity is "Probably up to no good." Ironically, that is, as Will Bunch of the Philadelphia Daily News pointed out, the exact phrase that George Zimmerman used when describing Trayvon Martin to the 9-1-1 call, that he must be up to no good. The sort of suspicion, that even though we don’t know anything about somebody, the mere happenstance of where they are or what they’re doing entitles us not just to harbor a suspicion about them, but to kill them. And it is amazing that American media outlets continue to use the word "militant" to describe people are killed by American drones without knowing their identity, even though we now know that the Obama administration uses that word in a incredibly deceitful and propagandistic way. And the fact that Obama, himself, is sitting at the top of this pyramid, making decisions about life and death — issuing death sentences without a shred of oversight or transparency, really ought to be provoking widespread outrage, and yet with the exception of a few circles and factions it really isn’t....


 


According to the President’s own aides, they’re boasting to the New York Times that he has declared that this was an "Easy" decision, not anything that he struggled with, something that he made quite easily. So, we find out that not only is exercising this radical power, he is not even having any struggles with conscience or constitutional questions or legal or intellectual quandaries about it. It’s something that his national-security adviser, Tom Donilon, also bragged to the New York Times about. It shows how "Comfortable" he is using force, even against American citizens. That I think reflects really on the type of person that occupies the Oval Office...."


YES OBAMA FOLLOWED THE PENTAGON WHICH CALLS INFANTS, WOMEN, TODDLERS, CIVILIANS KILLED, "MILITANTS", "AL QUAIDA", LYING THROUGH THEIR TEETH.    NOW ANY MALE CORPSE IS AUTOMATICALLY CALLED "MILITANTS", BECAUSE DEMOCRATS HAVE DEGENERATED INTO FASCIST, IDEOLOGICAL THUGS.   VOTING FOR CLASS/TOTALITARIAN PARTIES, MEANS VOTING FOR FASCISM, DEGENERAING POLICE STATE

Support WarIsACrime



Donate.








Tweet your Congress critters here.


Advertise on this site!




Facebook      Twitter





Our Store:



















Movie Memorabilia.



The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.