John Simkin

Hope you have a great 60th birthday. Are you having a party?

One of the most important campaigners against child labour was Frances Trollope. In 1839 Trollope decided to write a novel on young factory workers. She had become interested in the subject after reading a copy of the book on the life of Robert Blincoe in 1832. Before writing the novel she carried out a fact-finding mission to Manchester. Frances Trollope was accompanied by the French artist, Auguste Hervieu, who had been commissioned to produce illustrations for the book. Trollope and Hervieu spent several weeks visiting factories and having meeting with people involved in the campaign for factory reform. This included Richard Oastler, Joseph Raynor Stephens and John Doherty, the editor of The Poor Man's Advocate.

The first part of Michael Armstrong: Factory Boy, was published in 1840. Frances Trollope was the first woman to issue her novels in monthly parts. Costing one shilling a month, it was also the first industrial novel to be published in Britain. The conservative The Athenaeum, gave it a hostile reception and compared Trollope to James Rayner Stephens: "The most probable immediate effect of her pennings and her pencillings will be the burning of factories and the plunder of property of all kinds. The Rev. James Rayner Stephens has recently been sentenced to eighteen months imprisonment for using seditious and inflammatory language. The author of Michael Armstrong deserves as richly to have eighteen months in Chester Gaol. But if the text be bad, still worse are the plates that illustrate it. What, for instance, must be the effect of the first picture in No. V1 (mill children competing with pigs for food), on the heated imaginations of our great manufacturing towns, figuring as they do in every book-seller's window."

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/IRtrollope.htm

The illustration that they thought would cause a riot:

Robert Owen, the son of a saddler and ironmonger from Newtown in Wales, was working in Manchester that he heard about the success Richard Arkwright was having with his textile factory in Cromford. Richard was quick to see the potential of this way of manufacturing cloth and although he was only nineteen years old, borrowed £100 and set up a business as a manufacturer of spinning mules with John Jones, an engineer. In 1792 the partnership with Jones came to an end and Owen found work as a manager of Peter Drinkwater's large spinning factory in Manchester.

As manager of Drinkwater's factory, Owen met a lot of businessmen involved in the textile industry. This included David Dale, the owner of Chorton Twist Company in New Lanark, Scotland, the largest cotton-spinning business in Britain. The two men became close friends and in 1799 Robert married Dale's daughter, Caroline.

With the financial support of several businessmen from Manchester, Owen purchased Dale's four textile factories in New Lanark for £60,000. Under Owen's control, the Chorton Twist Company expanded rapidly. However, Robert Owen was not only concerned with making money, he was also interested in creating a new type of community at New Lanark. Owen believed that a person's character is formed by the effects of their environment. Owen was convinced that if he created the right environment, he could produce rational, good and humane people. Owen argued that people were naturally good but they were corrupted by the harsh way they were treated. For example, Owen was a strong opponent of physical punishment in schools and factories and immediately banned its use in New Lanark.

David Dale had originally built a large number of houses close to his factories in New Lanark. By the time Owen arrived, over 2,000 people lived in New Lanark village. One of the first decisions took when he became owner of New Lanark was to order the building of a school. Owen was convinced that education was crucially important in developing the type of person he wanted.

When Owen arrived at New Lanark children from as young as five were working for thirteen hours a day in the textile mills. He stopped employing children under ten and reduced their labour to ten hours a day. The young children went to the nursery and infant schools that Owen had built. Older children worked in the factory but also had to attend his secondary school for part of the day.

Owen's partners were concerned that these reforms would reduce profits. Unable to convince them of the wisdom of these reforms, Owen decided to borrow money from Archibald Campbell, a local banker, in order to buy their share of the business. Later, Owen sold shares in the business to men who agreed with the way he ran his factory.

Robert Owen hoped that the way he treated children at his New Lanark would encourage other factory owners to follow his example. It was therefore important for him to publicize his activities. He wrote several books including The Formation of Character (1813) and A New View of Society (1814). In 1815 Robert Owen sent detailed proposals to Parliament about his ideas on factory reform. This resulted in Owen appearing before Robert Peel and his House of Commons committee in April, 1816.

Owen toured the country making speeches on his experiments at New Lanark. He also publishing his speeches as pamphlets and sent free copies to influential people in Britain. In one two month period he spent £4,000 publicizing his activities. In his speeches, Owen argued that he was creating a "new moral world, a world from which the bitterness of divisive sectarian religion would be banished". His criticisms of the Church of England upset many people, including reformers such as William Wilberforce and William Cobbett.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/IRowen.htm

Robert Blincoe was born in 1792. At four years old Blincoe was placed in St. Pancras Workhouse, London. He was later told that his family name was Blincoe but he never discovered what happened to his parents. At the age of six Robert was sent to work as a chimney boy. However, Robert was not a success and after a few months he was returned to St. Pancras Workhouse.

In 1799, Lamberts recruited Robert and eighty other boys and girls from St. Pancras Workhouse. The boys were to be instructed in the trade of stocking weaving and the girls in lacemaking at Lowdam Mill, situated ten miles from Nottingham. Blincoe completed his apprenticeship in 1813, worked as an adult operative until 1817, when he set up his own small cotton-spinning business. Blincoe married a woman called Martha in 1819.

John Brown, a journalist from Bolton, met Robert Blincoe in 1822. He later explained: "It was in the spring of 1822, after having devoted a considerable time to the investigating of the effect of the manufacturing system, and factory establishments, on the health and morals of the manufacturing populace, that I first heard of the extraordinary sufferings of Robert Blincoe. At the same time, I was told of his earnest wish that those sufferings should, for the protection of the rising generation of parish children, be laid before the world. If this young man had not consigned to a cotton-factory, he would probably have been strong, healthy, and well grown; instead of which, he is diminutive as to statue, and his knees are grievously distorted."

Brown interviewed Blincoe for an article he was writing on child labour. Brown found the story so fascinating he decided to write Blincoe's biography. John Brown gave the biography to his friend Richard Carlile who was active in the campaign for factory legislation. Later that year John Brown committed suicide.

Robert Carlile eventually decided to publish Robert Blincoe's Memoir in his radical newspaper, The Lion. The story appeared in five weekly episodes from 25th January to 22nd February 1828. The story also appeared in Carlile's The Poor Man's Advocate. Five years later, John Doherty published Robert Blincoe's Memoir in pamphlet form. This included the following passage:

A girl named Mary Richards, who was thought remarkably handsome when she left the workhouse, and, who was not quite ten years of age, attended a drawing frame, below which, and about a foot from the floor, was a horizontal shaft, by which the frames above were turned. It happened one evening, when her apron was caught by the shaft. In an instant the poor girl was drawn by an irresistible force and dashed on the floor. She uttered the most heart-rending shrieks! Blincoe ran towards her, an agonized and helpless beholder of a scene of horror. He saw her whirled round and round with the shaft - he heard the bones of her arms, legs, thighs, etc. successively snap asunder, crushed, seemingly, to atoms, as the machinery whirled her round, and drew tighter and tighter her body within the works, her blood was scattered over the frame and streamed upon the floor, her head appeared dashed to pieces - at last, her mangled body was jammed in so fast, between the shafts and the floor, that the water being low and the wheels off the gear, it stopped the main shaft. When she was extricated, every bone was found broken - her head dreadfully crushed. She was carried off quite lifeless.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/IRblincoe.htm

Albert Rhys Williams was an American journalist in Belgium in 1914. He was asked by another journalist: "Wouldn't you like to have a photograph of yourself in these war-surroundings, just to take home as a souvenir?" The idea appealed to him. After rejecting some commonplace suggestions, the journalist exclaimed: "I have it. Shot as a German Spy. There's the wall to stand up against; and we'll pick a crack firing-squad out of these Belgians."

Williams later recalled: "I acquiesced in the plan and was led over to the wall while a movie-man whipped out a handkerchief and tied it over my eyes. The director then took a firing squad in hand. He had but recently witnessed the execution of a spy where he had almost burst with a desire to photograph the scene. It had been excruciating torture to restrain himself. But the experience had made him feel conversant with the etiquette of shooting a spy, as it was being done amongst the very best firing-squads. He made it now stand him in good stead." A week later the photograph appeared in the Daily Mirror. It included the caption: "The Belgians have a short, sharp method of dealing with the Kaiser's rat-hole spies. This one was caught near Termonde and, after being blindfolded, the firing-squad soon put an end to his inglorious career."

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/RUSwilliamsR.htm

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWjournalism.htm

http://news.yahoo.com/james-murdoch-doomed-phone-hackings-continued-fallout-164801582.html

It looks like James Murdoch is in a bit of trouble.

Like lying under oath.

At the committee hearing on Tuesday, Labour's Tom Watson asked James Murdoch: "When you signed off the Taylor payment, did you see or were you made aware of the full Neville (Thurlbeck) email, the transcript of the hacked voicemail messages?" Mr Murdoch replied: "No, I was not aware of that at the time". He had to say this otherwise he would have been guilty of paying money to cover-up a crime.

Last night, two senior executives at News International, Colin Myler (editor at the News of the World) and Tom Crone (head of the legal department), issued a statement said: "Just by way of clarification relating to Tuesday's CMS select committee hearing, we would like to point out that James Murdoch's recollection of what he was told when agreeing to settle the Gordon Taylor litigation was mistaken." In other words, he lied.

Tom Watson told the BBC: "This is the most significant moment of two years of investigation into phone hacking. If [Colin Myler and Tom Crone's] statement is accurate it shows James Murdoch had knowledge that others were involved in hacking as early as 2008, it shows he failed to act to discipline staff or initiate an internal investigation, which undermines Rupert Murdoch's evidence to our committee that the company had a zero tolerance to wrongdoing... More importantly it shows he not only failed to report a crime to the police but because there was a confidentiality clause involved in the settlement it means that he bought the silence of [chief executive of the Professional Footballers Association] Gordon Taylor and that could mean he is facing investigation for perverting the course of justice."

Miliband mulls MPs' demands to remove hacking-inquiry judge

Labour leader shares concerns over impartiality of Lord Justice Leveson after revelations that he attended parties at the home of Elisabeth Murdoch

The Independent

By Jane Merrick, Jonathan Owen, Brian Brady and Martin Hickman

Sunday, 24 July 2011

Ed Miliband is considering demands by MPs for the judge in charge of the phone-hacking inquiry to be removed from his post after reports that he had socialised with members of Rupert Murdoch's family.

Sources close to the Labour leader said he shared the concerns raised over the impartiality of Lord Justice Leveson after it emerged that the judge attended two parties at the London home of Elisabeth Murdoch, the News Corporation chairman's daughter who is regarded as the heir to the business, and her husband, Matthew Freud.

David Cameron knew about the parties before appointing Lord Leveson to chair the inquiry into the scandal, Downing Street admitted.

Reminds me of how LBJ formed the Warren Commission with fully compromised individuals.

At the committee hearing on Tuesday, Labour's Tom Watson asked James Murdoch: "When you signed off the Taylor payment, did you see or were you made aware of the full Neville (Thurlbeck) email, the transcript of the hacked voicemail messages?" Mr Murdoch replied: "No, I was not aware of that at the time". He had to say this otherwise he would have been guilty of paying money to cover-up a crime.

Last night, two senior executives at News International, Colin Myler and Tom Crone, issued a statement that said: "Just by way of clarification relating to Tuesday's CMS select committee hearing, we would like to point out that James Murdoch's recollection of what he was told when agreeing to settle the Gordon Taylor litigation was mistaken."

Tom Watson told the BBC: "This is the most significant moment of two years of investigation into phone hacking. If [Colin Myler and Tom Crone's] statement is accurate it shows James Murdoch had knowledge that others were involved in hacking as early as 2008, it shows he failed to act to discipline staff or initiate an internal investigation, which undermines Rupert Murdoch's evidence to our committee that the company had a zero tolerance to wrongdoing... More importantly it shows he not only failed to report a crime to the police but because there was a confidentiality clause involved in the settlement it means that he bought the silence of [chief executive of the Professional Footballers Association] Gordon Taylor and that could mean he is facing investigation for perverting the course of justice."

It is of course impossible for the Murdoch's to kill off all the witnesses. There is probably up to 50 people able to tell what really happened at the News of the World. So far they have been paid to keep quiet. When this stops, people will talk. That is what happened when Colin Myler a Tom Crone were sacked last week.

At the committee hearing on Tuesday, Labour's Tom Watson asked James Murdoch: "When you signed off the Taylor payment, did you see or were you made aware of the full Neville (Thurlbeck) email, the transcript of the hacked voicemail messages?" Mr Murdoch replied: "No, I was not aware of that at the time". He had to say this otherwise he would have been guilty of paying money to cover-up a crime.

Last night, two senior executives at News International, Colin Myler (editor at the News of the World) and Tom Crone (head of the legal department), issued a statement said: "Just by way of clarification relating to Tuesday's CMS select committee hearing, we would like to point out that James Murdoch's recollection of what he was told when agreeing to settle the Gordon Taylor litigation was mistaken." In other words, he lied.

Tom Watson told the BBC: "This is the most significant moment of two years of investigation into phone hacking. If [Colin Myler and Tom Crone's] statement is accurate it shows James Murdoch had knowledge that others were involved in hacking as early as 2008, it shows he failed to act to discipline staff or initiate an internal investigation, which undermines Rupert Murdoch's evidence to our committee that the company had a zero tolerance to wrongdoing... More importantly it shows he not only failed to report a crime to the police but because there was a confidentiality clause involved in the settlement it means that he bought the silence of [chief executive of the Professional Footballers Association] Gordon Taylor and that could mean he is facing investigation for perverting the course of justice."

In 1936 Lev Kamenev was arrested and charged with forming a terrorist organization to kill Joseph Stalin and other leaders of the government. At his trial Kamenev confessed: "I Kamenev, together with Zinoviev and Trotsky, organised and guided this conspiracy. My motives? I had become convinced that the party's - Stalin's policy - was successful and victorious. We, the opposition, had banked on a split in the party; but this hope proved groundless. We could no longer count on any serious domestic difficulties to allow us to overthrow. Stalin's leadership we were actuated by boundless hatred and by lust of power."

His fellow defendent, Gregory Zinoviev, also confessed: "I would like to repeat that I am fully and utterly guilty. I am guilty of having been the organizer, second only to Trotsky, of that block whose chosen task was the killing of Stalin. I was the principal organizer of Kirov's assassination. The party saw where we were going, and warned us; Stalin warned as scores of times; but we did not heed these warnings. We entered into an alliance with Trotsky.

Lev Kamenev and Gregory Zinoviev were both found guilty and executed in Moscow on 25th August, 1936. The Western media went along with the story. This is the way two major magazines reported the executions.

The New Republic (2nd September, 1936)

Some commentators, writing at a long distance from the scene, profess doubt that the executed men (Zinoviev and Kamenev) were guilty. It is suggested that they may have participated in a piece of stage play for the sake of friends or members of their families, held by the Soviet government as hostages and to be set free in exchange for this sacrifice. We see no reason to accept any of these laboured hypotheses, or to take the trial in other than its face value. Foreign correspondents present at the trial pointed out that the stories of these sixteen defendants, covering a series of complicated happenings over nearly five years, corroborated each other to an extent that would be quite impossible if they were not substantially true. The defendants gave no evidence of having been coached, parroting confessions painfully memorized in advance, or of being under any sort of duress.

The New Statesman (5th September, 1936)

Very likely there was a plot. We complain because, in the absence of independent witnesses, there is no way of knowing. It is their (Zinoviev and Kamenev) confession and decision to demand the death sentence for themselves that constitutes the mystery. If they had a hope of acquittal, why confess? If they were guilty of trying to murder Stalin and knew they would be shot in any case, why cringe and crawl instead of defiantly justifying their plot on revolutionary grounds? We would be glad to hear the explanation.

Leon Trotsky, of course, knew the whole thing was a conspiracy. He wrote in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch (17th January, 1937): "The Western attorneys of the GPU represent the confessions of Zinoviev and the others as spontaneous expressions of their sincere repentance. This is the most shameless deception of public opinion that can be imagined. For almost 10 years, Zinoviev, Kamenev and the others found themselves under almost insupportable moral pressure with the menace of death approaching ever closer and closer. If an inquisitor judge were to put questions to this victim and inspire the answers, his success would be guaranteed in advance. Human nerves, even the strongest, have a limited capacity to endure moral torture."

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/RUSpurge.htm

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/RUSkamenev.htm

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/RUSzinoviev.htm

It was only after the war when the West turned against Stalin that the historians changed their mind about the guilt of these men.

I am pleased to see that William Kelly has joined. Hopefully others will join and we can use the forum to educate the public about the assassination. If enough people join it could become a more democratic form of Wikipedia. It is also a great place to publicize books and websites.

Rupert Murdoch is a key figure in Operation Mockingbird (or whatever it is called now). One of the reasons that he has been allowed to obtain so much power over the world's media, is that he has always been willing to support the interests of the ruling elite. A good example of this is the Iraq War. Murdoch has always claimed that he allows all his editors to make their own decisions about the "political angle" of their newspaper. It is of course just a coincidence that of the 175 newspapers that he controlled, were keen supporters of the war. The Murdoch newspapers are always against political conspiracies. Look at the way they covered the death of Dr. David Kelly. Another interesting fact is that the CD with all the details of the MP expenses, was offered and rejected by Murdoch's newspapers, before being bought by the Daily Telegraph. Why did they reject what was considered to be the scoop of the century? One of the reasons was that they could not use the material to "hurt" MPs they did not approve of. The material meant that it would hurt some of their greatest friends in Parliament.

More Murdoch Press coverage... again from "The Australian"...

A neighbour said: "I feared the worst a couple of months ago. He wasn't looking in great shape physically. He was not his usual, bubbly, friendly self."

Another neighbour said Mr Hoare was "paranoid" about people seeing him and spoke of a "conspiracy" and that he was afraid of the police and the Government. "He talked about all sorts of problems that he had in his life. A lot of it was alcohol-related. His passage through life has not been an easy one." The neighbour added: "He said he was in trouble and he was worried about people coming to get him."

Tributes were paid to Mr Hoare on Twitter last night with David Yelland, a former Editor of The Sun, writing: "Sean Hoare was trying to be honest, struggling with addiction. But he was a good man. My God."

Mr Hoare was sacked from the News of the World by Mr Coulson because of the effects his drink and drug problems were having on his health. Mr Hoare, who had previously worked with Mr Coulson on The Sun's Bizarre showbiz section and later at the Sunday People under Neil Wallis, was notorious on Fleet Street for his destructive lifestyle.

He told a fellow journalist of his "rock star's breakfast" - Jack Daniels and a line of cocaine. He said he took three grams of cocaine a day, which cost him about $1500 a week.

"Everyone got overconfident. We thought we could do coke, go to Brown's, sit in the Red Room with Paula Yates and Michael Hutchence. Everyone got a bit carried away," he once told The Guardian.

Former colleagues said that his dismissal had left him bitter and resentful. In an interview with the New York Times he claimed that Mr Coulson not only knew of phone hacking at the News of the World but he had "actively encouraged" it. He said he had played tape recordings of hacked messages for Mr Coulson. His allegations were heavily rejected by his former boss, who had become David Cameron's Director of Communications in May last year.

I have seen the two interviews that Hoare gave to the BBC. He did appear to be paranoid. He was also clearly someone who had problems with drink and drugs. However, that does not mean he was not telling the truth. Only two reporters from the News of the World have gone on record that they were involved in phone-hacking. Sam Hoare and Paul McMullan. In doing so, they both opened themselves up to criminal prosecution. McMullan also appears to be paranoid. On Tuesday, McMullan said on BBC television, that he also fears for his life. I once read that the purpose of killing JFK assassination witnesses was not only to keep them quiet, but to stop others who knew the truth to keep quiet. I suspect the same is also true of the Hoare case. Sometimes it makes sense to feel paranoid.

James Murdoch appears to have given misleading parliamentary testimony about a key phone-hacking cover-up, according to evidence obtained by the Guardian.

Rupert Murdoch's son sought to deny that "astronomic sums" had been secretly paid out to a hacking victim as hush-money. He told MPs the company's legal advice was that the likely award of damages was £250,000, and that this explained the size of a confidential payout he agreed could be paid in 2008 to hacking victim Gordon Taylor, chief executive of the footballers' union the PFA.

But full details of the legal negotiations obtained by the Guardian show that in fact Murdoch's company executives paid far more than that to buy Taylor's silence. After consulting James Murdoch, they eventually agreed to pay £425,000 damages, almost twice as much as the alleged likely award.

With Taylor's legal costs at £220,000, and their own solicitors' fees of some £300,000, the total cost to the News of the World to keep the case out of court amounted to almost £1m.

This huge confidential settlement succeeded in concealing the fact, detailed in the lawsuit papers, that Neville Thurlbeck, the paper's chief reporter, was implicated by an email referring to "Neville". Police had been forced to hand over a copy of this email to the other side's lawyers.

James Murdoch further claimed to the MPs that this email had been concealed from him by two company executives, the lawyer Tom Crone and the editor Colin Myler, when he was persuaded to sign off the secret deal.

Had the email come to light at the time, it would have destroyed the News of the World's public stance that phone hacking was the work of a single "rogue reporter" who had already been jailed.

The details of the negotiations between Taylor and the News of the World also show that James Murdoch was incorrect in assuring MPs that the confidentiality deal was normal.

Sources familiar with the negotiations say that not only was the size of the settlement to be kept confidential, but that News International also got an agreement that the very fact of a confidential settlement was also to be kept confidential.

This was so unusual that a special court hearing by a judicial figure, Deputy Master Mark, had to be held in September 2008, before it was agreed that the court file could be sealed, because it possibly contained evidence of criminal behaviour.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/20/james-murdoch-gordon-taylor-payoff

The main strategy adopted by James and Rupert Murdoch was that they were shocked and ashamed about the hacking scandal and that they were doing all they could to help the truth to come out. This proved to be a complete lie when the information was dragged out of James Murdoch (apparently, Rupert knew nothing about what was going on) that News International were still paying the legal fees of Glen Mulcaire, the man who hacked into 5,000 phones, including those of murder victims such as Milly Downer. Why would they do that if they were truly horrified by Mulcaire's behaviour. The reason of course is that they are paying for Mulclaire's silence. In the same way that they paid nearly 2 million to keep Gordon Taylor and Max Clifford to keep quiet about what they knew about the phone-hacking. James Murdoch unbelievably told the committee that he was unaware of how much Mulcaire had been paid since he lost his job at the News of the World. Both James and Rupert Murdoch both refused to stop paying Mulcaire's legal fees (hush money). It appears that they are not sorry at all and are still doing what they can to cover-up what happened.

News Corporation has decided to terminate arrangements to pay legal fees of private investigator Glenn Mulcaire "with immediate effect."

The law firm hired by News International in 2007 to review allegations of phone hacking says it is being prevented from responding to "inaccurate" comments made by James Murdoch. Mr Murdoch said a letter written by the law firm made executives at News International believe that hacking was a "matter of the past". Harbottle and Lewis says it is not being allowed to breach client confidentiality.

The main strategy adopted by James and Rupert Murdoch was that they were shocked and ashamed about the hacking scandal and that they were doing all they could to help the truth to come out. This proved to be a complete lie when the information was dragged out of James Murdoch (apparently, Rupert knew nothing about what was going on) that News International were still paying the legal fees of Glen Mulcaire, the man who hacked into 5,000 phones, including those of murder victims such as Milly Downer. Why would they do that if they were truly horrified by Mulcaire's behaviour. The reason of course is that they are paying for Mulclaire's silence. In the same way that they paid nearly 2 million to keep Gordon Taylor and Max Clifford to keep quiet about what they knew about the phone-hacking. James Murdoch unbelievably told the committee that he was unaware of how much Mulcaire had been paid since he lost his job at the News of the World. Both James and Rupert Murdoch both refused to stop paying Mulcaire's legal fees (hush money). It appears that they are not sorry at all and are still doing what they can to cover-up what happened.

News Corporation has decided to terminate arrangements to pay legal fees of private investigator Glenn Mulcaire "with immediate effect."

The law firm hired by News International in 2007 to review allegations of phone hacking says it is being prevented from responding to "inaccurate" comments made by James Murdoch. Mr Murdoch said a letter written by the law firm made executives at News International believe that hacking was a "matter of the past". Harbottle and Lewis says it is not being allowed to breach client confidentiality.

Quora is like an interactive Wikipedia. It has 1.5 registered users and is a good place to promote your views on the JFK assassination. It is very easy to join. Here is the section on John F. Kennedy.

http://www.quora.com/John-F-Kennedy

Would you also make similar accusations of The Guardian simply because they ran Davies' story?

Mike, I know little about the Guardian. The problem with the Murdoch media empire is that what I pointed to is the entrenched practice. Is it the same with the Guardian? I don't know.

Did any of the Murdoch press report on this?

She and another neighbour described Hoare as a jovial man who would often sit on his balcony, overlooking the block entrance, and talk to residents. They said he lived in the block with his partner, a woman called Jo, who they believed had been away on holiday. Neither had seen Hoare for a few days.

Paul Pritchard, 30, another neighbour, said Sean Hoare was "the most sociable" resident, and they would regularly see him watering the communal front lawn.

"It is just such a shock. About a month ago he said he felt unwell and he said he went to the doctors for a checkup. Then I saw him again and he seemed well."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/18/news-of-the-world-sean-hoare

On the basis of the above, the Guardian does seem a tad more "fair and balanced" on this story. You may hold a different opinion.

As someone living in Britain who kept a close look at the way the case has been reported. The scandal would never have been exposed if it had not been for the Guardian. Since the Guardian broke the story, all the News International stable of newspapers refused to publish anything on the story. They even sent in the Met to tell the Guardian that the story was untrue. In fact, every last detail that has appeared in the Guardian has been proven to be true. Even the so-called serious newspapers owned by Murdoch, the Times and Sunday Times, refused to cover the story until two weeks ago, it was revealed that Milly Downer's phone was hacked. That is why so many people are now refusing to buy these newspapers, that were more keen to cover-up the misdeeds of their owners.

The main strategy adopted by James and Rupert Murdoch was that they were shocked and ashamed about the hacking scandal and that they were doing all they could to help the truth to come out. This proved to be a complete lie when the information was dragged out of James Murdoch (apparently, Rupert knew nothing about what was going on) that News International were still paying the legal fees of Glen Mulcaire, the man who hacked into 5,000 phones, including those of murder victims such as Milly Downer. Why would they do that if they were truly horrified by Mulcaire's behaviour. The reason of course is that they are paying for Mulclaire's silence. In the same way that they paid nearly 2 million to keep Gordon Taylor and Max Clifford to keep quiet about what they knew about the phone-hacking. James Murdoch unbelievably told the committee that he was unaware of how much Mulcaire had been paid since he lost his job at the News of the World. Both James and Rupert Murdoch both refused to stop paying Mulcaire's legal fees (hush money). It appears that they are not sorry at all and are still doing what they can to cover-up what happened.

The main strategy adopted by James and Rupert Murdoch was that they were shocked and ashamed about the hacking scandal and that they were doing all they could to help the truth to come out. This proved to be a complete lie when the information was dragged out of James Murdoch (apparently, Rupert knew nothing about what was going on) that News International were still paying the legal fees of Glen Mulcaire, the man who hacked into 5,000 phones, including those of murder victims such as Milly Downer. Why would they do that if they were truly horrified by Mulcaire's behaviour. The reason of course is that they are paying for Mulclaire's silence. In the same way that they paid nearly 2 million to keep Gordon Taylor and Max Clifford to keep quiet about what they knew about the phone-hacking. James Murdoch unbelievably told the committee that he was unaware of how much Mulcaire had been paid since he lost his job at the News of the World. Both James and Rupert Murdoch both refused to stop paying Mulcaire's legal fees (hush money). It appears that they are not sorry at all and are still doing what they can to cover-up what happened.

Police are not treating the death of Sean Hoare as suspicious.

That was quick...

UPDATE: Police describe Mr. Hoare's death as "unexplained" but not suspicious.

As we know from the JFK witnesses and researchers who suffered early deaths, that it is not too difficult to arrange "natural deaths". This is especially true when it is not in the interests of the police to say someone has not been murdered. As with the case with Dr. David Kelly, when they do make a bad job of it, the authorities will continue to cover-up the case.

Hoare gave a filmed interview with the BBC. Can this be used as evidence in court? Not only did he say that Coulson ordered phone-hacking, but the police were paid for information. In a BBC radio interview he said Coulson's insistence he did not know of the practice was "a lie, it is simply a lie". Hoare said he was once a close friend of Coulson's, and told the New York Times the two first worked together at the Sun, where, Hoare said, he played recordings of hacked messages for Coulson. At the News of the World, Hoare said, he continued to inform Coulson of his activities.

The police kept him quiet by interviewing him under caution rather than as a witness. Is it a coincidence that Hoare died on the same day that the John Yates, the man who said the case did not need to be reopened, resigned (he did this instead of being suspended and investigated).

As with the JFK assassination, the witnesses are beginning to die. Sean Hoare, the News of the World journalist, who told the New York Times that Andy Coulson knew about the phone-hacking, was found dead today. Hoare was only in his mid-40s.

A few excerpts from an article by Alex Ralph writing for The Australian:

Mr Hoare was sacked from the News of the World by Mr Coulson because of the effects his drink and drug problems were having on his health. Mr Hoare, who had previously worked

with Mr Coulsonon The Sun's Bizarre showbiz section and later at the Sunday People under Neil Wallis, was notorious on Fleet Street for his destructive lifestyle.

He told a fellow journalist of his "rock star's breakfast" - Jack Daniels and a line of cocaine. He said he took three grams of cocaine a day, which cost him about $1500 a week.

........Although he was known to be in ill health and smoked and drank, he was still active. He recently attended a weekend children's party and had been injured taking down the marquee.

He told The Guardian that he had broken his nose and injured his foot when he was struck by the pole.

One neighbour said last night: "He was physically going down hill. He was yellow in colour and wasn't looking well for the last month and was off sorts and I was really worrying about him.

Full article: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/sudden-death-of-news-of-the-world-whistleblower-shocks-colleagues/story-e6frg996-1226097373281

____________________________________________________________________________

And as with the JFK assassination, it's going to prove difficult to sort fact from fiction.

Hoare gave a filmed interview with the BBC. Can this be used as evidence in court? Not only did he say that Coulson ordered phone-hacking, but the police were paid for information. In a BBC radio interview he said Coulson's insistence he did not know of the practice was "a lie, it is simply a lie". Hoare said he was once a close friend of Coulson's, and told the New York Times the two first worked together at the Sun, where, Hoare said, he played recordings of hacked messages for Coulson. At the News of the World, Hoare said, he continued to inform Coulson of his activities.

The police kept him quiet by interviewing him under caution rather than as a witness. Is it a coincidence that Hoare died on the same day that the John Yates, the man who said the case did not need to be reopened, resigned (he did this instead of being suspended and investigated).

News of the World phone-hacking whistleblower found dead

Death of Sean Hoare – who was first named journalist to allege Andy Coulson knew of hacking – not being treated as suspicious

Yes, the police already say that the death is not suspicious. There is nothing to see here.

As with the JFK assassination, the witnesses are beginning to die. Sean Hoare was only in his mid-40s.

As with the JFK assassination, the witnesses are beginning to die. Sean Hoare, the News of the World journalist, who told the New York Times that Andy Coulson knew about the phone-hacking, was found dead today. Hoare was only in his mid-40s.

John Yates, the man who led the investigation into Tony Blair, has been forced to resign over corruption charges. I suspect he was paid money to say that Blair did not have a case to answer.