Lord Duckhunter

All the bird's that have been fired have come on that show looking pretty good. It is a great show by the way, Dara O Briain is great on it.

Exactly, but that included Brown. From his speech (which was well delivered) you would have thought he had nothing to do with NI. He tried to make out he wanted an enquiry into NI, but was stopped by everybody else, whereas Bradshaw said in the week that it was a political decision not to have one. ALL govt's have been too close to NI for 35 years, including Brown's, he can not try to claim otherwise now. At least Tony Blair has kept quiet, perhaps Brown would have been advised to do the same. Perhaps this need for revenge is one of the "psychological flaws" that Campbell spoke about.

Doesn't tally with what Ben Bradshaw said on The Daily Politics, he said that they didn't want a enquiry because Brown was already seen as a weak PM and they didn't want to annoy NI. Also why, if things were so bad did he have Brookes to Chequers and attend her wedding. At least Milliband was man enough to adress the past. Brown is in denial...........

No they're complete and utter shysters. If they can get through the expenses scandal with only a few low profile "victims", they will worm their way out of this. They are all such hypocrites. When the public were calling for an election in light of the expenses scandal the line was that "they needed to stay to clear the mess up". When NI say that Brook's needs to stay to clear the mess up, they're all up in arms over it. They all bent over and let Murdoch screw them, but now are all showing us how independent they are (with a few notable exceptions)

She stayed at Chequers after an invite from Mrs Brown, are you saying that Brown was so scared of NI that he had to invite her to his house for the weekend?

There should be a fit & proper persons test, but I'm uncomfortable with politicans dictating who should own media companies. I hope this isn't the start of more meddling because after the expenses scandal, they're not exactly fit and proper people themselves.

The editor whose wedding brown attended 3 years later and who was invited to spend a weekend with Mrs Brown? Had me and Mrs Duck been so disressed about something that we were in tears, if anyone ran a story about our children after getting their medical records, I would not go to their wedding and I certainly would not let Mrs Duck invite her over for the weekend. Brown saw the oppurtunity to try and repay NI for abandoning him. The Sun would not have run this Brown is wrong splash in the present climate without being 100% sure Brown was lieing. The broader issue of press being muzzled because of a few criminal journo's is perfectly shown in this Brown episode. When he went from studio to studio telling this tale of woe, why wasn't he asked some searching questions? The first question should surely have been; If you were so upset by this, why did you attend Brook's wedding? and the second question should be; As a Govt minister and then PM surely you should have reported any illegal activety to the police, why wait 5 years to bring it up? Lets hope that this whole sorry hacking affair does not mean our politcians of all colours get a free ride.Lets not forget it was our free press that caught them all with their noses in the trough.

I went to Southport once to stay with some friends. They have a big parade where Orangemen from Liverpool march every 12th July. It was basically a big **** up, but I couldn't believe how big it was.I know it's not the same as the NI ones, but I was amazed how big a deal it was, I really had no idea.

Seems strange that nobody has posted that the Sun are running that Gordon Brown basically lied. Just seen the news and it’s all over their front page, story obtained from another parent, and Brown authorised the story. As he attended Brook’s wedding as well as inviting her to Chequers, this makes more sense. There is no way they would run a front page splash like this, without being absolutely sure of their ground. We’ll have to wait and see if Brown now takes some sort of legal action over today’s Sun story. Dragging your child’s health into a lie, to gain revenge because you lost the support of a paper is pretty low ,in my opinion

Girls night out, with Mrs Brown and the wife of Murdoch, some 3 years after Murdoch's empire had made her so traumatised..........

I just find the hypocrisy of so many people over this issue nauseating.

Whilst Murdoch's papers were Labour supporting nothing was said. Police were paid (admitted to Parliament in 2003) for information, phones were hacked (Clive goodman was jailed in 2007), medical records were obtained (Brown's son in 2006). This is what Ben Bradshaw said on Daily Politics "That was a discussion in the cabinet in the last year of the Labour government about whether to have a public inquiry . Gordon Brown had the added political difficulty that he was seen as a weakened Prime Minister. If we had gone down that route there would have been a hail storm not just from the Murdoch press but from all the other hostile media that we were just trying to find a diversion or an excuse" So the Labour cabinet, that included Ed Milliband decided against public enquiry for political reasons. Therefore, surely it is a political issue as well as a moral one, particulary when the people making this political decision are the ones doing most of the shouting against Murdoch.

Surely it is "political point scoring" to be disgusted by some investigating, but not when it concerns a "notorious tax-avoider", who just so happens to be a leftie bogeyman. Political point scoring is surely going onto the BBC, telling of your tears and distress over an incident that happened in 2006, yet in 2009 you attend the wedding of the person who caused such distress, and your wife invited the same person to spend a weekend at your holiday home, again after the event. Brown has never got over the fact that NI turned against him and he is now touring the TV studios, not because of some moral Crusade, or outrage (as Tom Watson has done), but on the basis of revenge. The whole episode has showed parts of the press in a terrible light, but it has also shown the hypocrisy at the very heart of this country. From the millions "appalled" at the behaviour of Murdoch's empire, whilst buying the Sun and watching Sky. To people like Steve Coogan, who happily take the millions on offer for starring in 20th Century Fox films. Add to that the audacity of some of Labour's good and great waging war against NI after attending weddings, parties and generally cosing up to them, makes me sick. Brooks admitted to parliament in March 2003 that the police were paid for information. No, action from a Labour Govt, no enquires, just wedding invites for Brown, Blair and Campbell. Lord Ashcroft issued a statement saying "In March 2002, Sir Nick Montagu, then the chairman of the Inland Revenue, wrote personally to me saying: “It is now clear that the caller was masquerading as you, and I am extremely sorry that we failed to spot as bogus someone who was able to give a reference number which matched your name and who displayed some familiarity with your tax affairs. Sir Nick referred the matter to the Information Commissioner and, a year later, I learnt from an investigating officer acting for the Commissioner that, in fact, five calls had been received by the Inland Revenue, between 9 and 14 February 2001, from someone who purported to be me. " Do lefties find this illegal act disgusting, or did he have it coming?

I presume the Lefties are equally disgusted that Lord Ashcroft's personal details were targetted.

And why did he attend the Editors wedding some 3 years AFTER this illegal act? Could it be that things changed once the Murdoch press changed their support back to the Torys?

Is that the same Murdoch that Labour cozied up to for years and years, or a different one? Was Murdoch aware, or conduct any of the hacking? I presume you are so sickened that you wont watch Sky or a 20th Century Fox film?

I was dissapointed with John Yate's reveiw of the evidence back in 2006. He is clearly an incompant police officer who is too close to the political leaders. Maybe some of his earlier cases should be looked at again, including his "Cash for peerages inquiry"?

Not enough distress to stop them attending Brook’s wedding in June 2009...... Or Brooks attending a "sleepover" of female friends of Sarah Brown's at Chequers in 2008. They were obviously over the distress and had made up, but like the rest of the Labour Party are leaking stuff to show just how much distance is between themselves and Brooks. It's pitiful, they were in it as deep as the Torys.

He seems like a nice guy............. "He hit the headlines in July 2003 when he became one of the first journalists to name David Kelly as Andrew Gilligan's source of information about the dossier into Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. As a result he was summoned as a witness before the Hutton inquiry into Kelly's death." http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/dec/13/tom-baldwin-ed-miliband-spin-doctor

So perhaps Ashcroft's allegations have some legs. http://order-order.com/tag/tom-baldwin/

Spot on. Dont buy The Sun, The Times, have a sky subscription, go and watch 20th Century Fox films. That's too much for the hypocrites, complain about Murdoch and rally against his evil empire, whilst buying his goods. Steve Coogan was ranting and raving on Newsnight and yet when it comes to starring in "Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian" for 20th Century Fox, well that's quite a different matter. Email your MP, you'll be able to tell your friends about the brave fight you've put up against the Murdoch's.You would have done your bit, and still be able to watch Premiership football from the comfort of your living room.

It is ********,that these allagations are being made on the basis that they are "after" Milliband, these allagations have been around for ages. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/534769.stm "They insist the latest details could only have been obtained by hacking into the party's bank accounts. " Amanda Platell said on The Andrew Marr Show that this was suspected back when she worked for William Hague, and as the story says they appeared in Ashcroft's book 5 years ago. Surely it is legitimate for a paper to investigate whether people's bank accounts were hacked into or an attempt made to hack into.

Ah, but where is the "middle" ground? It has moved somewhat to the right, with Labour only being able to get elected with a right facing party. In fact they were so determined to move to the right, they rebranded themselves and abadonded principles they had held for many years. England is mainly a right wing country, with only the Jocks and Taffs keeping the Torys out. The reason the NOTW, Mail and Sun (which seem to be the 3 papers that get up lefties noses) sell so many copies is their politics is to the right and that is where the majority sit. Even when The Sun was supporting New Labour, their slant on Europe, and other major issues was always to the right.

It would be interesting to see the sales figures for the Sun and Times over the past few days.

The circulation figures for this Sunday will obviously be down, but a bloke on Newsnight said last night, that it will last a couple of Sundays and then be back to normal levels. Lets see what the NOTW circulation figures are in 3 months time, and then we'll get a fuller picture of just how outraged the British people are. The British people have it in their hands to ruin Murdoch, we dont need new laws, if people dont buy his papers and cancel their Sky subscriptions, and advertisers dont advertise he's finished. If people continue to pour money into his coffers, all the condemnation from the likes of Hugh Grant & Lord Presscott count for nothing. I'm afraid the British people like reading his papers and watching Sky and although disgusted by what's going on, aren't so disgusted that they will stop doing so.In that respect DP is right, it does say a lot about our Country..........