Just hearing the recording of Rebekah Brooks addressing the sacked staff at News of the World, she appeared to be saying 'if you knew what I know, you'd understand why the title had to be closed down'. Which not only sounds a bit childish, sort of 'my dad is bigger than your dad', but rather suggests that she has information that presumably the police don't have yet (or do?) The arrogance attached to this is monstrous. News Int. has already said that it lied to a parliamentary committee and now that they will tell people only what they feel they have to. I would be quite keen to see these people disabused of that notion.
The bottom line with this much admired, though seemingly not for her intellect, woman Rebekah Brooks is that she feels a roomful of, at least mainly guiltless individuals can be sacked, but that someone at the centre of the storm, her, should be untouched. If her assertions to these people were not just an attempt to dodge face to face opprobrium, but based on truths she knows, that is absolutely incredible. As a senior executive of a major organisation she feels it right and proper to bring up information about criminal activity only when she feels she has to. Or didn't she mean that?
No comments:
Post a Comment