Limits To Free Speech Are Necessary

Wrongful Murder Suspect Compensated Robert Murat, a formal suspect in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, will be given more than half a million pounds in libel damages by British media outlets, according to reports today.

He deserves hell of a lot more than that!

The way in which the tabloids portrayed this man was absolutely outrageous. In one case, he was actually described as behaving like the convicted child-murderer, Ian Huntley, in order to demonise him as much as possible, and it was also suggested that he had been caught with child pornography.

A completely innocent man! - portrayed by the tabloids as a paedophile and a child murderer.

The tabloids will have made many millions out of the numerous lurid stories and lies that they told about this man throughout their hysterical and hateful media campaign concerning the child's disappearance. They should, therefore, have to pay out considerably more than half a million.

Still.

Thank goodness for the laws of libel, eh?

Dig - dig - to all those men who think that freedom of speech should be 'absolute' and never curtailed in any way.

Men, more than any other group these days, need the protection of the libel laws.

on free speech ...

Hi Harry

I sympathize with your campaigns against the knife block but I am a great believer in free speech. I know from your work that you also believe in free speech so how can you reconcile this contradiction?

Hi J

There is no real contradiction between my views on this cursed knife block and a belief in free speech in the sense that, when it comes to 'social' issues, there is no black and white. There is no 'truth'. It is always a question of balance.

And so when I say that I believe in free speech I do not really mean that all speech should be totally legal. And my guess is that you feel the same way.

Should it be legal for a woman to make a false accusation

For example, do you think that it should be legal for a woman to go around accusing an innocent man of being a child abuser or a wife beater? - perhaps simply because she wants a better deal in a divorce court. Should it be legal for a woman to make a false accusation of rape? Should it be legal for an influential person - or newspaper - to lie and lie about others and, for example, encourage others to kill them?

I suspect that you would agree that such speech should be illegal.

My concern about free speech is mostly to do with the censorship typically associated with political correctness; i.e. that one should not say certain things - even when true - simply because others might be offended in some way; or - just as likely these days - pretend to be offended in order to stop others from putting forward a perfectly legitimate, but opposing, point of view.

This nonsense has gone way too far - with 'men' being just about the only group about which people can say anything - no matter how offensive or untrue.

My concern about free speech has also had much to do with the way in which lofty individuals such as politicians, judges, academics etc seem to have been protected in the past from strong direct criticism about their various nefarious activities; such as downright dishonesty, corruption and lying.

For example, it was not so long ago that the mainstream media never dared to accuse such people of such things.

And, indeed, one of the main purposes of Angry Harry in its early days was to help to break down the unwillingness of people to come out in open verbal hostility toward those who well deserved to be on the receiving end of it. I wanted to encourage MRAs to be forceful and, quite frankly, to be rude toward those who were walking all over men with impunity and treating them as if they were completely worthless.

I was not bundled off into oblivion

And the only way to encourage MRAs to do such things was to do them myself and to show them that I 'survived'; i.e. I was not bundled off into oblivion somewhere. In other words, I could get away with it, and, hence, so could they.

True, I did have problems with my webhosters and also with Google and Amazon in those days as a result of my outspokenness, but I am still here!

LOL!

But I think that your email reveals an issue that I have wanted to address for some time, and it is the notion that there is some kind of 'absolute' that one can adhere to when determining what one's viewpoint should be over any given matter.

For example, the idea that, "I believe in free speech," and that, therefore, all speech must be legal (no matter how unfair, how dangerous etc etc) does not seem to be a good idea.

Similarly, "I believe in the death penalty," would probably have so many qualifiers associated with it that the statement on its own would be meaningless.

My point is that such grandiose statements do not usually remain valid under more careful scrutiny. There are always boundaries, exceptions and complications that curtail them in some way.

And the issue of 'free speech' is no exception.

there are no simple solutions.

And as you search and search for 'solutions' to the various problems that we commonly address round here, you will find that there are no simple solutions. They just do not exist.

And so when you find yourself boldly saying, "I believe in A, B or C," as being a 'solution' to a given social problem, the chances are very high that you have not thought deeply enough about the problem, because such problems are usually so inordinately complex that they are much too difficult to grasp; let alone solve.

And one of the reasons that MRAs need to take this on board is that, in my view, too much time is spent on trying to figure out relatively simplistic 'societal solutions' to the hugely complex problems that they face when, in fact, it would be far better if they simply became 'activists' (rather than 'academics') e.g. see my pieces The Truth About The Truth and Generating Heat.

So, Yes, I, too, "believe in free speech". But only up to a point!

LOL!

Best wishes

Harry

Knife Crime In the wake of recent knife murders across the country, ministers unveiled a hastily-assembled package of measures intended to tackle the problem, which some police chiefs now see as a greater challenge than stopping terrorist attacks. - probably only of interest to Brits.

On and on and on they go.

Week after week after week.

"We must do something about the appalling levels of stabbings and knife murders that keep taking place in this country," the police and the politicians say.

And what do they do?

They do absolutely NOTHING! - except mess about seeing if they can grab themselves a bit more power on the basis of this appalling level of violence.

For example, ...

On Monday, Gordon Brown said the government was taking a range of measures to tackle knife crime, including more visible policing, greater stop-and-search powers, increasing use of metal detectors and tougher prison sentences or community punishments.

Increase surveillance. Increase detection. Increase punishment.

But what they won't do, of course, is to implement policies that will promote families and their cohesion. Nor will they implement policies that empower parents, teachers and police officers to deal with our wayward youth more effectively.

The Labour government has no real genuine concern about crime or violence - except, of course, the fear that it might bring about bad publicity.

This, they do worry about.

And, of course, the politicians won't do anything about the disgusting knife block.

Sold as the "All Men Are Basta#ds" Knife Block

Remember: Promoting or selling this knife block would be illegal in the UK if it depicted any group other than 'men'.

Maybe Fathers4Justice can do something about it.

Maybe if Fathers4Justice pulled a stunt to point the finger at the scumbags who keep selling this knife block then it would embarrass the police and the politicians - because it would demonstrate to the public just how worthless and bigoted they are.

It would show the public that while the police and the politicians are well aware that this knife block promotes violence - as is evidenced by the fact that it would be illegal if it depicted any group other than 'men' - when it comes to men being stabbed, these officials are completely unconcerned and, indeed, are quite happy to see such stabbings actually promoted.

they have no genuine desire to discourage knife crime against men.

In other words, all their public wailing and whining about the high levels of knife crime is nothing but the usual empty charade that we get from government officials - because, quite clearly, they have no genuine desire to discourage knife crime against men.

Now, before you all start yawning - that's what I would do; if I was not such a coward.

I would sit on roofs just like F4J activists do.

Now, for my less able readers - of which there are many! - the point about this knife block being sold in the UK is not only to do with the levels of violence (particularly stabbings) that it might inspire, it is to do with the fact that it would be illegal if it depicted any group other than 'men' - and it would be illegal precisely because the politicians and the police really do believe that this knife block does incite violence.

Well, if they believe this, then why don't they do something about it?

D'ya see?

You've got them by the short and curlies.

And they would surely hate for this to be witnessed by millions of people - particularly millions of men.

Hmm. I think I'll have to start my own roof-topping activist group.

What shall I call it, eh?

Hmm.

Men4Justice?

Nah. Too obvious.

Men4Equality?

Nah. Too naff.

Ah yes, I know!

AngryHarry4President!

That's the one!

And now I must get back to writing my future award-winning piece about Harriet Harman.