4 ms·

He did claim harassment with the police against the journalist who was initally investigating him: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0rd9y99grzo https://www.bb

by bragh 2mo ago

He did claim harassment with the police against the journalist who was initally investigating him: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0rd9y99grzo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0rd9y99grzo Now consider that this was in UK.

NewJazz 2mo ago
Uh, what about it being in the uk? I guess I've heard the press can be aggressive, but not sure if that's what you meant.
- dist-epoch 2mo ago
  The UK has no legal freedom of speech protection. Which means you can use the courts to silence the press, as Russian oligarchs have been doing for many years: > Government vows to stop Russian oligarchs ‘abusing’ British courts. Dominic Raab said the government was ‘taking action’ to end the ‘bullying’ to ‘protect our free press’ https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/russia-ukraine-oligarchs-british-courts-free-speech-b2037951.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/russia-ukrain... > UK vows to stop the super-rich using courts to silence critics https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-60773942 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-60773942
  - foldr 2mo ago
    > The UK has no legal freedom of speech protection. This is completely untrue, as you can confirm by googling. The UK has historically had a problem with overly restrictive libel laws and libel tourism, but that point can be made without making statements that are obviously false.
    - dahdum 2mo ago
      From an American viewpoint, no one else has “free speech”, UK included. The First Amendment is globally unique. So it’s a matter of definitions. > The First Amendment to the US Constitution provides almost absolute protection to freedom of expression. By contrast, European and EU law curtails the right to freedom of expression. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2025/772890/EPRS_BRI(2025)772890_EN.pdf https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2025/7728...
      - owebmaster 2mo ago
        > From an American viewpoint, no one else has “free speech”, UK included. That's funny as we see what happens regularly to people trying to exercise their free speech right against a small country in the middle east.
      - foldr 2mo ago
        Yes, the First Amendment is unusually permissive. But the sentence "the UK has no legal freedom of speech protection" isn't sensible way to make that point. We're commenting on events which have received extensive (and probably disproportionate) coverage in the UK press, despite the best efforts of Arday and Cambridge. Clearly, their scheme to exploit UK law to silence the press didn't work out. Also, on a minor note, this is an article about something that happened in the UK. An American viewpoint is as valid as any other, but it's not the most relevant here.

by bragh 2mo ago

NewJazz 2mo ago

Uh, what about it being in the uk? I guess I've heard the press can be aggressive, but not sure if that's what you meant.

dist-epoch 2mo ago
The UK has no legal freedom of speech protection. Which means you can use the courts to silence the press, as Russian oligarchs have been doing for many years: > Government vows to stop Russian oligarchs ‘abusing’ British courts. Dominic Raab said the government was ‘taking action’ to end the ‘bullying’ to ‘protect our free press’ https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/russia-ukraine-oligarchs-british-courts-free-speech-b2037951.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/russia-ukrain... > UK vows to stop the super-rich using courts to silence critics https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-60773942 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-60773942
- foldr 2mo ago
  > The UK has no legal freedom of speech protection. This is completely untrue, as you can confirm by googling. The UK has historically had a problem with overly restrictive libel laws and libel tourism, but that point can be made without making statements that are obviously false.
  - dahdum 2mo ago
    From an American viewpoint, no one else has “free speech”, UK included. The First Amendment is globally unique. So it’s a matter of definitions. > The First Amendment to the US Constitution provides almost absolute protection to freedom of expression. By contrast, European and EU law curtails the right to freedom of expression. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2025/772890/EPRS_BRI(2025)772890_EN.pdf https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2025/7728...
    - owebmaster 2mo ago
      > From an American viewpoint, no one else has “free speech”, UK included. That's funny as we see what happens regularly to people trying to exercise their free speech right against a small country in the middle east.
    - foldr 2mo ago
      Yes, the First Amendment is unusually permissive. But the sentence "the UK has no legal freedom of speech protection" isn't sensible way to make that point. We're commenting on events which have received extensive (and probably disproportionate) coverage in the UK press, despite the best efforts of Arday and Cambridge. Clearly, their scheme to exploit UK law to silence the press didn't work out. Also, on a minor note, this is an article about something that happened in the UK. An American viewpoint is as valid as any other, but it's not the most relevant here.