I think their privacy breach scandals are entirely deserving. When we live in a country where people vote government that advocate the suffering of some chosen individuals because people do not want to be righteous religious and holy people, what do they suppose is unacceptable, when people hack into their private life and personal details to gather information to report news? It is the society we want to live in and I don’t think that is necessarily bad the bad thing about it is the possibility that somebody might use that power for an evil purpose which they bandy around like they are not using their own power for evil purposes. Should MPs get involved when you are chosen by society behind your back as a scapegoat for suffering? Of course not but it is because you think it is the wrong thing for them to do that they do it because they don’t want to be told by you what to do. So why do you tell politicians not to take certain prerogatives people offer then, because you are telling them what to do or because you are holding out on something for which they are the biggest beneficiaries? There are too many people in this country responsible for problems people have that they cannot discuss with others involved as victims of the hacking scandal for it to constitute a bad thing so when we say it is bad we must qualify what we mean-no body that harms people like they have has a divine right to get through this life not being hurt by anything especially bearing in mind it is still completely relentless because they have a culture and ask themselves the question of why not if you can all the time. I am well within my rights to betray anybody I like too.

Why would people cause others physical pain then make a scandal of it without reason? Except they are certain that they have society and community goons who have cultural power to oppress people with all over the place asking themselves the question of why not? There are too many of them involved in the hacking scandal for it to become a bad thing and when we say it is we must qualify what we mean.

The most of important question in this matter is what is being slaughtered here i.e. what if the scapegoat is stronger than they are, should the scapegoat become a victim by law?

For my part the big boys and their ruin peoples lives and get to know rich people and then get rich in a way that is based on knowing people to earn a living to block people from getting employment think they have reached the peak but have no reached anything, as I have put up with them-the recession and everything for long enough and I intend to break them as well.

20/7/2011 PM response to Questions on the Hacking Scandal

I do wonder what the Prime Minister expects me to do; apparently the way they see the world is if Mr A has something they don’t, the rule is hold him down no matter how long it takes until you have taken it away from him and owned it, getting subsidies from tax payers when it takes up all your time for your such nefarious nonsense. If somebody is not more unique and more special than they are, how is the person meant to run a successful business in order to employ them, so they can get up to their other peoples employee rubbish, after which when they are finished become rich and famous? You see I have not been given very much of a choice. Those of them that still have fame to bandy about apparently just continue to think when they bully me and complain they will win this kind of a fight, no matter how much they improve themselves on things I tell them not to do to me with their stupid commercials and media and of course the underlying message behind everything I do has always been the ‘leave me alone’-it is the one they have never adhered to because they are big bad bullies and I am not.