I see you don't attempt to address the substance of the points made by Dizzy.

Which are:

1. Did Andy Coulson know of the activities of people working for him?

The same question is applicable to Tom Watson and Gordon Brown on the activities of Damian McBride and Derek Draper.

The answer to both cases is probably but it can't be proved (except for Tom Watson who was copied in on the emails but claimed he never read them...)

2. Is it fair to expect that those in charge are responsible for the activities of those beneath them.

Again I would suggest that in both the cases of Coulson and Brown/Watson, the answer should be yes. So if Coulson goes, why not Brown and Watson?

I am not a Tory spin-blogger (although I doubt you'll believe that), just fed up with pre-school antics of politicians trying to score points against one another.

I'd be careful about passing judgement too quickly, seeing as no-one has the facts right now. The Guardian is making allegations that need to be dealt with, absolutely, but you're pointing the finger far too soon.

Smeargate took several days to unravel and this might follow the same pattern.

"except for Tom Watson who was copied in on the emails but claimed he never read them..."

Tom was _not_ copied on the emails. He was merely mentioned in passing in one of them.

Actually Bob I don't think that Coulson is the nub of the story here. Surely the real issue is the systematic use of illegal methods by a multi-national media corporation to obtain illicit information about a whole raft of prominent individuals in British society.

This is made worse by the close relationship that Murdoch's empire has with both of the main parties' ruling cliques. On the face of it that makes it all the more suspicious that the Met and the CPS took no further action against News International when they jailed one hack and one PI. Scared/complicit political elites leaning on our law enforcement agencies?

This nasty anti-democratic can of worms must not be reduced to the sleazy mud-slinging side-show that the MacBride affair was. That would be like objecting to the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq because General *** ********* ******* had been caught buggering a rent boy at tax payer's expense.

It seems to me that this goes to the very heart of our so-called democratic system and I think a lot of people on all sides are going to come up smelling of pooh if the truth is allowed to come out.

Ian... I don't know whether that is the case in respect of the General, so I ain't taking any chances. I'm sure that's not what the Army are saying when they say they want more money spent on our boys". Bob

Yes, you're right LFaT. I did take the trouble of going back through Iain Dale's attempts to smear Tom Watson and Gordon Brown over the MacBride e-mails... but I couldn't find your comment urging him to "be careful about passing judgement too quickly".

Strange that.

Comparing Coulson's position to Brown's with Draper/McBride is pathetic. Brown is not necessarily responsible for some stupid website or silly emails concocted by people in his office. Nor would he expected particularly to know about it.

But for an editor not to know that his hacks are getting a large amount of stories from copious wire taps. That is directly the responsibility of the editor and it surely the only way he wouldn't be fully aware is if he had been deliberately turning a blind ear.

I thought you were all busy cleaning up politics. Shouldn't you be ignoring the story rather than revelling in it if that is the case?

To draw any sort of analogy between the two cases is absolutely farcical.

My justifcation for this argument is as follows:

1) McBride's acts were done when employed by the government
2) Coulson didn't actually do these things himself, he was in charge of the newspaper. Does that make Gordon responsible for everything MI5 does then? Should he resign over the torture issue? Should he resign over any abuses our troops have done?
3) Coulson did the honorable thing at the time
4) Rightly or wrongly in their methods, the NOTW guys ere looking for facts. Not making up fiction
5) The motives for them doing so was to get stories, not to smear people

Looks to me like Damian has been busy since he left.....

The Conservative Party have done nothing wrong if Coulson has to go , no-one cares although I have to say I thought we already knew all this.
That is not the same as Mc Bride where the culture of the Brown inner circle was revealed . As for whether Watson knew , well , with your own money , what would you bet ?

Lovely to see these smug 'non-Tory' blogger/blowhards hoist by their own petard.

Absolutely lovely.

Keep those links bookmarked, Bob - I can see them coming handy in future ;-)

I said on the previous post that we should prepare for the Sound of Silence from Tory bloggers over Andy Coulson. How wrong I was. Instead, they are all absolutely on message trying to say it is a storm in a tea cup, or blaming Labour for exposing Coulson as either a fool or an incompetent.

I'm not. All buggers should be investigated.

Bob, found your blog via Dizzy.

Apply the McBride story with this sorry just doesn't work. If Coulson is either incompetent or a liar what is Brown (or Balls) - since Brown/Balls employed McBride...

Also, if you are going to make an arguement make it a coherent one. I suugest you read dizzy's entry on this. He hasn't just cut and pasted various comments from other blogs. Your blurb on your site says that the comments on this site are your own? But most appear to be quotes from other sites....Also, since I live in your constituency where is your link to your expenses??? Or are you soooo over that now?

"The motives for them (the News of the World(doing so was to get stories, not to smear people."

Doncha just love 'em.

tenpin, I don't claim any expenses. I receive an allowance in accordance with a scheme recommended by an external panel, and I claim nothing above that. But if you are local you will know my allowances are reported in the free newspapers delivered to every door, and in the Express and Star newspaper.

"But if you are local you will know my allowances are reported in the free newspapers delivered to every door, and in the Express and Star newspaper."

I can vouch for that...

For goodness sake WheresMyVote! An editor edits stuff and decides what's in the paper. Not remotely comparable with McBride's position. Except in so far as Coulson too should be sacked and Cameron has been a fool to employ him when he had just been offed by Murdoch for being careless, incompetent, conspiratorial, sleeping on watch, or whatever it was. And better folk than you have put their hands in their pockets and pulled out wads of cash for repeating this groundless allegation that Watson was copied in to the Redrag emails. He was not.

What the Screws of the World did was gutter journalism. Insofar as it happened on Coulson's watch he is either directly culpable or incompetent. Either way Cameron's judgement in hiring him and in his failure this morning to investigate, leaves real questions as to Cameron's fitness to be Prime Minister.

I know and accept the arguments that Brown is in the wrong job. That does not mean that the judgement of the primary alternative should not be questioned at a time like this

Blimey Bob! I wasn't making an allegation against the Chief of the General Staff, it was a rather ridiculous hypothetical scenario used for illustrative purposes. Are the lawyers regularly on your tail for this kind of thing? :-)

Let me put it in another, completely factual, manner:

This nasty anti-democratic can of worms must not be reduced to the sleazy mud-slinging side-show that the MacBride affair was. That would be like objecting to the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq because General Sir Richard Dannatt is an evangelical god botherer who moaned to the Daily Wail that Britain should return to Judeo-Christian values to combat the mythical Islamist threat.

Hi Bob: Do you mind if I set up my burger stall here to catch any passing traffic?

Andy Coulson claims his mobilephone is hacked