Tuesday, 16 June 2009

Here We Go The Long Expected - Lets Get The Bloggers

'Justice' Eady has pronouced that Bloggers can be identified when it is in the Public Interest to do so.

Time to move OH abroad methinks before the fingermen, take a rest from fiddling their Amex cards and start hunting for their critics.

Nightjack, winner of the Orwell Prize has been closed down since April.

Meanwhile in Iran the State has desperately closed down all forms of electronic communication but it is still leaking out

H/T Cato

You cannot kill an idea Lord McCreedy


Revolutionary Road

I suppose at the end of the day, it is who defines the 'public interest'- The State or the Public


Anonymous said...

Don't worry. I think all you Libertarian bloggers are safe.

Let's face it - its not as if you represent a real threat to anybody is it ?

If anything, you probably serve as a useful 'safety valve' - meaning that if people think that venting spleen on here amounts to actually 'doing something' then the establishment are happy.

Likewise all those wated votes for The Jackanory Team, The English Democrats et al....

The one thing the establishment really didn't want was the one thing that actually happened in the North West and Yorkshire.

Everything else is just a sideshow and a distraction.

Dressing up as a film character might have got you soem media coverage, OH, but it achieved precisely fuck all else...

WV: dequisse - strangely appropriate in a weird way...

Anonymous said...

Poor Nightjack. So this is what the Orwell Prize entails.

Pavlov's Cat said...

Ah so it was that utter cunt Justice Eady, the libel tourists friend. Enough said

Rightwinggit said...

Down to the Times, of all people..

How many unnamed sources do you think are going to give you information now, arseholes?

You can't be trusted.

The Editor said...


Patrick said...

Eady quoth: "More generally, when making a judgment as to the value of comments made about police affairs by 'insiders', it may sometimes help to know how experienced or senior the commentator is."

No more unattributable briefings from politicians to the press, then?

No, I thought not.

Anna Raccoon said...

I've just run this story too, and not wishing to argue with you Guthrum, but I was under the impression that Nightjack announced that he was taking his blog down when he won the Orwell prize.
Are we sure it has been taken down today, or is it just that it is 'not up', so to speak, and everyone is making a connection with the Eady judgement?
I'll do a bit of checking.

SaltedSlug said...

Times hatchet job

The total cunts.

Simon said...

Ironic isn't it that Mr Justice Eady made the Nightjack ruling. He is the judge that made a ruling in favour of Khalid bin Mahfouz, a Saudi banker, who had sued Rachel Ehrenfeld, an American academic. That ruling "almost single- handedly launched the American freedom of speech backlash against UK libel laws"

bloggers anonymous not

Guthrum said...

Are we sure it has been taken down today, or is it just that it is 'not up', so to speak,

He took it down before he got the Orwell Prize in April, as he was at risk of being outed.

The dead tree press are doing the state's work for them/

Rightwinggit said...

Fuck the Times, I'm not buying their paper again.

Ivor Bigot said...

That Times "story" is absolutely staggering. They make the point that his posts can be linked to the real-life cases. Er... yes.. but only because they fucking unmasked him! So now a fine and dedicated police officer has had his career wrecked, all for a few column inches.

What venal scum.


VotR said...

The news story tells me the government and the courts are scared of their critics enough to try and scare back.

I like it when they are scared.

woman on a raft said...

What Slug said. The legal reasoning is probably correct, although Eady is still a deplorable guardian of public interest. The point was, The Times didn't have to ask that question.

The fuckwits didn't have to dob him in to his employers, who knew who he was and were doing their best to avoid it as NightJack presented a rare sympathetic view of police officers.

Instead, writhing in jealousy and unable to write anything half so good, the Times put the constabulary in a position where they had to acknowledge it and take action.

When Nightjack applied for the injunction, they could have declined to challenge it, or they could have just dropped the story.

Even if they wanted to challenge the injunction, they could have simply let the story drop on the grounds that it would make sure that no serving officer would ever risk whispering to them again if they ran it.

Fucking idiot cunts; they just cut their own throats and made it harder for every other journalist to get people to tell them the truth.

I will now put on my tinfoil hat and ask if they are in some plot to reduce news to a diet of celebrity bowel-washouts?

Anonymous said...

Anon 14:11, you're being a bit hard on OH,but you do have a point. The only real opposition to this elected dictatorship is the BNP.

Tory Poppins said...


Guthrum said...

The one thing the establishment really didn't want was the one thing that actually happened in the North West and Yorkshire.

That must be the principled stand that the anti-Eu BNP took in standing for election to the EU Parliament, when the majority of the electorate in the UK did not bother to lend any legitimacy to the elections by actually voting.

All aboard the gravy train, with the CON/LAB/Social Democrats

Anonymous said...

"Guthrum said...

...when the majority of the electorate in the UK did not bother to lend any legitimacy to the elections by actually voting."

If you're seriously suggesting that the low turnout at the Euro elections was due to the electorate making a conscious statement about the legitimacy of those elections by staying away from the polls, then I'm afraid you're even more deluded than I previously thought...

Anonymous said...

I have said for a couple of years that the government will not be happy until the web is like an online version of radio 4. They could never ignore such a means of free speech. There will and are of course all sorts of pretexts being used to bring the web to heel. This will continue.

ovent said...

Although the examples the Times give have barely more detail than the press would print (and post conviction detail at that so no chance of influencing the cases) Nightjack could surely have done a better job of anonymising his stories.

The details of what Bill Chadwick was charged with have been in the public domain for some time.

The Times story seems to be completely without merit.

T England said...

Iain Dale says it could have implications for blog commenters as well, so commenters need something like TOR do they not?

woman on a raft said...

Collectors of irony might like to note that both barristers were from Matrix Chambers.

Anthony White QC for the Mighty Behmoth Times Newspapers Limited.

Hugh Tomlinson QC for A Blogger who happens to work as a minor functionary but knows the difference between right and wrong

That Eady ruling in
Author of a Blog -v- Times Newspapers,
Neutral Citation Number:
[2009] EWHC 1358 (QB)
Case No: HQ09X02293

The Times story is just snarky; they don't like people who write direct and wanted to punish NightJack for building an audience. That's THEIR audience as of right, don't you understand, you people, you can't read anything which hasn't been through their washer.

hermit said...

So the scum will know O.H's name & address etc., but will they know the commentors.
Excuse me if it sounds silly, but why not have a 'surrogate' blogger?
For example: O.H. puts an article on saying everything in our wonderful country is hunky dory etc. Then: ...
Anonymous says: Oh no it's fucking well not. Have you heard what the cunts are doing today... etc.

M de Plouquenet said...

Nightjack stopped as he was sacred shitless of umpteen different bruvs turning up at his home to "discuss" being fitted up & tortured in custody. Jah.

The Editor said...

Dear Mrs Raft,

You make many good points but what it comes down to is 'Good men/women standing up for what's right'.

I appreciate 'Nightjack' thought he could get away with being anonymous but the fact is we are chipped, pinned, tracked and recorded whatever we do, and he should know better than most.

It's time to stand up and be counted.

JD said...

If the Iranian people can work around internet censorship, so can UK bloggers. We just have to start being more careful about leaving no trails. It is tedious to have to take such steps, but not difficult. The printed papers are on their way out anyway, and now they cannot offer protection to their sources their demise will hasten. Start using proxies - Google it if you don't know how. JD.

North Northwester said...

OT I know, but I think you might want to publicize this.


Richard Dale is trying to help the Iranians crash government websites.

I hope you and your readers will take a look and maybe spread the word.

This is one in the server for Amahdidinnerjacket and his girl-hurting pig-fuckers.

Pardon my Spartan.

Katabasis said...

"The details of what Bill Chadwick was charged with have been in the public domain for some time."

Ovent - thanks for that link!

FFS - lots of people are already rallying behind the "public interest" defence with respect to Nightjack referring to cases. How many of them would do that if they knew the Chadwick story that the Times focuses on has already had much of its key info released to the public domain??....


Anna Raccoon said...

The dead tree press are doing the state's work for them/


T'was ever thus Guthrum, no change there.

Anonymous said...

The link to Nightjack's "Survival Guide for Decent Folks" is of course now dead. You might find a copy here.

Anonymous said...

Iran, smells like CIA spirit.

Ratings and Recommendations by outbrain


Related Posts with Thumbnails