Should they have let Rupbert Murdoch swear on the bible?

He is Jewish so the bible will mean nothing to him alien

if they believe in the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth why would they swear on a book they din't believe in?

candlelight2012 wrote:: He is Jewish so the bible will mean nothing to him

if they believe in the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth why would they swear on a book they didn't believe in?

ooooops didnt mean to quote myself I was trying to sort out my spelling

i dont think it matters if you swear on the dictionary. some people will tell the truth and some wouldn't. if i thought i could get out of doing ten years in jail, i'd say whatever it takes.

candlelight2012 wrote:: He is Jewish so the bible will mean nothing to him

if they believe in the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth why would they swear on a book they din't believe in?

Does seem a bit daft, doesn't it? That's our legal system for you though, candle.

It wouldn't mean any more to me if I ever 'swore' on it either, though I'm not of any particular faith.

Might as well ask me to swear on a TV Guide. Should they have let Rupbert Murdoch swear on the bible? 2454432500

Should they have let Rupbert Murdoch swear on the bible? 2454432500

batou wrote:: i dont think it matters if you swear on the dictionary. some people will tell the truth and some wouldn't. if i thought i could get out of doing ten years in jail, i'd say whatever it takes.

This ^^ really. He's a liar, caught out already many times over, so they are stoopid in extremis if they expect this sneaky git to tell the truth ever.

But it is odd he didn't have to swear on the Torah (is that the one, or Koran?). You can tell these writings mean nothing to me, but they are sacred works to many and to incorporate them into a perjurous statement (and let's face it, that's what he says will be) to give it apparent credence does seem an affront to those who hold them holy.

On the plus side, it won't make him any more popular!

albino

Yeap, ,meaningless.

It didn't do the old git any good anyway. They had him squirming (a bit) here and there, no matter what he swore on.

He reckons that newspapers will be out of business in 20 years time anyway, because of competition from online news sites. I reckon sooner than that.

The thing is now: are they going to allow Sky to keep its licence? Should they have let Rupbert Murdoch swear on the bible? 486510651

Should they have let Rupbert Murdoch swear on the bible? 486510651

dhould hsnvr rrn holimg a yors in hid hsnd

candlelight2012 wrote:: dhould hsnvr rrn holimg a yors in hid hsnd

Should they have let Rupbert Murdoch swear on the bible? Thumbnail.aspx?q=4803968714211490&id=b84ef8abdebde3cd83e9a8b3cd1192f4&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.thinketg.com%2fLibraries%2fMarketing_Images%2fconfused_cat_huh.sflb

candlelight2012 wrote:: dhould hsnvr rrn holimg a yors in hid hsnd

Mega-pissed.... Very Happy

I wouldn't trust Murdoch whatever he swore on!

Interestingly (well, to me anyway!) not all people of faith swear on a religious text in court - Quakers don't, as they don't agree with the taking of oaths. They simply let their "yea be yea", and their "nay be nay".

Mandy

batou wrote:: i dont think it matters if you swear on the dictionary. some people will tell the truth and some wouldn't. if i thought i could get out of doing ten years in jail, i'd say whatever it takes.

Yeah that

Should they have let Rupbert Murdoch swear on the bible? 1680093717

HollowII wrote:

candlelight2012 wrote:: dhould hsnvr rrn holimg a yors in hid hsnd

Mega-pissed.... Very Happy

lol its my phone! It has a mind of its own (tat sentence took 1o mins to type)

or maybe i just invented a new language!

snnuim[ kiummmou

candlelight2012 wrote:

HollowII wrote:

candlelight2012 wrote:: dhould hsnvr rrn holimg a yors in hid hsnd

Mega-pissed.... Very Happy

lol its my phone! It has a mind of its own (tat sentence took 1o mins to type)

I believe you... Very Happy

I've 'took the oath' on the bible & told porkies before now. I'm not religious so it meant nothing to me.

I don't lie to people however. Just the state. Should they have let Rupbert Murdoch swear on the bible? 1780324424

I've done it too.

And it made me feel all tingly and warm Should they have let Rupbert Murdoch swear on the bible? 1780324424

Anyone else notice the difference between the humble, forgetful, confused, dottery, poor old guy who appeared before the Select Committee and the sharp character who was giving evidence to the Leveson Enquiry?

Should they have let Rupbert Murdoch swear on the bible? 4125452612

Should they have let Rupbert Murdoch swear on the bible? 4125452612

featheredfish wrote:: Anyone else notice the difference between the humble, forgetful, confused, dottery, poor old guy who appeared before the Select Committee and the sharp character who was giving evidence to the Leveson Enquiry?

Well, it's quite common for War Criminals facing trail to get (temporary) fatal dementia. Maybe it's a trick Murdoch learned from reading the newspaper Should they have let Rupbert Murdoch swear on the bible? 1780324424

featheredfish wrote:: Anyone else notice the difference between the humble, forgetful, confused, dottery, poor old guy who appeared before the Select Committee and the sharp character who was giving evidence to the Leveson Enquiry?

I do think someone is gunning for him but he won't go down without a fight. It will be interesting to see who sinks with him

Big guns don't sink.

They float for a while thanks to those massive anchors they have.

Then someone comes and rescues them.

I've possibly smoked one too many this evening... Should they have let Rupbert Murdoch swear on the bible? 1680093717