Libel Laws

Libel Laws Force JC To Lie

Here’s an apology in today’s JC:

On May 13 2011, we published an article entitled “Pears funded charity which hosted jihadist” which related to the Pears Foundation, a charity called Forward Thinking, and an individual called Tafazal Mohammed.

We have since accepted that Mr Mohammed is not a jihadist and have apologised to him, the Pears Foundation and Forward Thinking for this error. It follows that there was no basis for linking Forward Thinking’s director, Mr McTernan, to any jihadist. We apologise to Mr McTernan for the distress caused.

This is a lie.

The entire purpose of Forward Thinking is to advance the cause of jihadist groups from the Middle East. Have a look through our archives, and you’ll see.  In particular, these three items.

Forward Thinking is run by Oliver McTernan – an ex-Catholic priest whose interests include having sex with women and helping jihadist groups which want to kill Jews.

I was told an interesting story by a prominent pro-peace individual who had spoken on platforms with Forward Thinking. He stopped when it became clear to him that this was not simply an organisation which supported peace talks with Hamas. It actually supported Hamas, itself.

The problem with British libel laws is that it allows public figures and those engaged in high level political campaigning – like Oliver McTernan – to force small poor, small circulation newspapers to withdraw allegations which are transparently and demonstrably true.

Why?

Because if you sue – particularly on a “no win no fee basis” – it will almost always be cheaper to settle than to fight to trial: even if you win.

Claimants know this. They therefore routinely fire off letters before action, with the sole intention of preventing critical coverage of their activities. The worse you behave, the greater the opportunity to cry “libel” when your conduct is reported.

This is “Lawfare”: the use of litigation by supporters of extreme and vicious politics to advance their disgraceful cause.