The truth is not out there

Friday was a funny day wasn't it? I was actually quite busy at work so it was not until the afternoon that I actually heard about Andy Coulson resigning, then I had to build a new Nabru sofa on Saturday, hence the lack of posts about it.

Of course, such explanations would probably not satisfy the leftie blogosphere who will see the lack of comment on any right of centre blog in terms of "oh look they're commenting on this hugely significance negative story about their team!" So it's probably easier for me to simply say that I received a call personally from CCHQ asking me not to comment along with my paycheck from the CIA who are my true paymasters.

So, putting the idiotic conspiratorial loopiness aside, what is there to say about the resignation of Coulson in light of the "listening to voicemail scandal" (am still refusing to call something so pathetically non-hackerish as hacking incidentally). The most obvious thing to note is that the entire saga has become a double-whammy, because it's not just about Westminster politics but corporate politics too.

On the one hand it's no doubt lovely for the Left to "stick it" to the Tories and their "tory-led coalition" (a phrase that sounds so fake if you count how it is wheeled out these days as the line to take incidentally). The resignation has made the Guardian reading trendy liberal left ejaculate with immense pleasure, after all, it is about the seeking of truth dammit!

Rarely at any point of course is the corporate politics of the whole thing mentioned. By that I mean the tax-avoiding Guardian is engaging in a corporate battle with a business rival. Heaven forbid that there might be underlying motives for its campaign aside from journalistic and moral truth-seeking.

Personally speaking it will be interesting to see in the coming months how the Murdoch news empire chooses to react to this corporately. No doubt there are minions within that organisation currently seeking out any scandal the can to attack the Guardian with in retaliation, and, naturally, when they do it will be billed as shameful corporate politics and/or dirty tricks.

Is evidence going to surface that proves beyond reasonable doubt for a jury that Andy Coulson personally sanctioned the illegal access of others communications? Who knows. He's already guilty for so many, you only have to look at the netards on Twitter with their pathetic "Arrest Coulson" twibbons (stupid word) to note that he's already guilty anyway whatever evidence may or may not exist or be speculated upon.

To be honest, the real hilarity with this story is how well it highlights the sheer hypocrisy that goes with politics and the tribe. Take the Bristol murder case and the arrest of the victim's landlord as a case in point.

The shouts came up at the time of the terrible way in which the guy was facing a trial by media when he had not even been charged (and was released and someone else has now been charged); and yet now we have Andy Coulson being found guilty in advance by the very same people who turned up their noses in moral righteousness when such things happened to someone else.

Then again, Jo Yeates Landlord wasn't in Number 10 and associated with the evil child-eating bastard Tories.

Even now we have talk about "secret tapes" that may hold the truth of who knew what, when and where the bodies are buried. If they turn up then perhaps we'll know the truth, then again perhaps we won't. It won;t matter anyway, because if they don't damn Coulson there will remain the speculation, and if they don't turn up there will always the very idea that they might exist to ensure the perpetuation of his guilt, because that is how politics works.

Look at the cases of David Kelly, Iraq, or Cash for Honours. Those who believe Kelly was murdered by some sort of Establishment conspiracy will always do so. Those who believe Blair lied over Iraq will never waiver from that viewpoint whatever evidence does or does not exist about it. Likewise - and I'm guilty of this myself - some will think Honours were given out for money because we've connected the dots and reached our conclusion based upon on own tribal view no matter the evidence.

The only truth really about Coulson is that some have decided he's guilty and will always b so no matter the evidence for or against. Just look at what Chris Bryant MP said,

"I hope now finally that the police will be able to conduct the full, transparent, and thorough inquiry into phone hacking that we are still waiting for and that the murky truth will come to light."

The "murky truth"? He's already decided on what he thinks the truth is right there by referring to it that way. It doesn't matter what happens. Of course, even if he's arrested, charged and convicted there will be some or will not accept the guilt too, because that is how history, especially political history tends to work.

What do I think about Coulson? Frankly I don't care if he's guilty or not. The infringement of privacy by the News of the World or anyone else in the media exists because we have a culture that wants to consume these scoops. Some may stand on the sidelines wringing their hands at how terribly wrong it all is, but they're just as guilty of lapping up such stories when they come along.

The whole saga is the inevitable consequence of the human desire for gossip in a world with immediate and mass communicable media.