| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
An illuminating film on the Rachel Ehrenfeld case:
This documentary short film, produced by the Moving Picture Institute, shows how Saudi billionaire Khalid Bin Mafhouz exploits the British legal system and sues for libel whenever he is the subject of a terrorism accusation.Directed by MPI fellow Jared Lapidus, the film explains how Mahfouz filed a libel suit against Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, author of Funding Evil; How Terrorism is Financed -- and How to Stop It. The suit was not filed in the United States, where the book was published and sold, but instead in London, where Mahfouz associates ordered 23 copies online. The judge ordered all copies of the book pulped, and ordered Ehrenfeld to pay the legal fees and damages, despite the fact that nothing in her book about Saudi funding of terrorism was ever disproved.
Ehrenfeld, however, is fighting back. In The Libel Tourist she speaks about her shocking experience of modern-day book burning by British courts, and the First Amendment lawsuit she filed against Mahfouz. Her law suit was the impetus for "Rachel's Law" -- in March 31, 2008, the New York State Legislature unanimously passed -- the Libel Terrorism Protection Act To Protect American Journalists and Authors From Overseas Defamation Lawsuits. With the new law on her side, Dr. Ehrenfeld is heading back to court to win her lawsuit against bin Mahfouz.
In MAY 2008, the the NATIONAL version of New York State's "Rachel's Law" -- THE FREE SPEECH PROTECTION ACT (S-2977 & H.R. 5814) was introduced by Reps. Peter King (R-NY) & Anthony Weiner (D-NY) and Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) & and Arlen Specter (R-PA). The bill has been assigned to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees.
If free speech is important to you, contact the House and Senate Judiciary Committee Members and staff and urge them to approve the bill and vote for its passage as soon as possible. Helping Dr. Ehrenfeld is helping each and every American – including YOU! To Donate & Help help -Visit: www.acdemocracy.org
Posted by Robert at July 9, 2008 9:04 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
"Unfortunately, on December 20, 2007, NY State Court of Appeals sidestepped the First Amendment rights and protections."
Shouldn't she have filed suit in the federal courts for First Amendment protection?
Of course, the NY constitution may also contain language protecting freedom of speech and the press. Many state constitutions do. It might worthwhile for her lawyers to investigate which states have the strongest protective language in their constitutions, and courts with the strongest tradition of upholding constitutional rights, and filing suit in one of those states.
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at July 9, 2008 9:33 AM
Bringing this libel tourist out of the closet provides for a most delicious just dessert.
Bravo Rachel Ehrenfeld, and thank heavens the ACLU recognized her case as being:
One of the most important First Amendment cases of the past 25 years.
This video would serve as a wonderful Public Service Announcement. This video explaining the threat to our Constitutional right to "freedom of expression" should be shown as frequently on the msm as the PSA's of the '70's dicussing pollution and nuclear threats.
Posted by: heroyalwhyness at July 9, 2008 9:40 AM
The Libel Tourist - Arabic Version
Download it while it remains available.
Hand this robed libel tourist, billionaire Khalid Bin Mafhouz, his head on one of his own gilded platters.
Posted by: heroyalwhyness at July 9, 2008 9:45 AM
"Pen, tongue" -- though to an Infidel ear archaic -- is the islamically accurate way to describe propaganda efforts on behalf of Jihad. Similar archaic phrasing about the weapon of "gold" or "wealth," is used to describe the deployment of tens of billions of dollars (mainly by the Saudis, but also by other rich Arabs and Muslims) to promote Jihad in the non-Muslim lands.
"Funding Evil" is one way of describing what has here repeatedly been called the Money Weapon.
Posted by: Hugh at July 9, 2008 9:53 AM
I have a deep acquaintance with the laws of defamation as they apply in Britain. They are a disgrace to a free society.
Aliens should not enjoy the benefit of protecting their reputations in British courts.
Posted by: LondonBorn&Bred at July 9, 2008 11:44 AM
Didn't the New York legislature recently pass a law to give protection to authors against libel tourism in response to Ehrenfeld's plight? Or am I misremembering that?
Posted by: Anthony (Los Angeles) at July 9, 2008 12:48 PM
Didn't the New York legislature recently pass a law to give protection to authors against libel tourism in response to Ehrenfeld's plight? Or am I misremembering that? - Posted by: Anthony (Los Angeles)
Libel Terrorism Protection Act (Rachel's Law) signed by New York Governor
at July 9, 2008 1:03 PM
Only in the UK. Our entire political and judicial system is designed to aid the islamisation of the west.
Not only does our legal system discriminate against its own people it even has the audacity to try and tell other countries how to work.
What the hell have my countries unfair laws got to do with America?
If you have any spare troops send them over, screw iraq, it's the UK that needs a change of leadership before it becomes the biggest threat to the west.
The UK, supporting Islamic terrorists since 1997.
Posted by: DaveMate at July 9, 2008 1:56 PM
She is making very strong claims. If she can prove them, she has nothing to fear in the British courts. The British libel laws are one of the reasons why the British press is careful not to publish unsubstantiated claims. This is a good thing, and contributes to a free society - Britain is hardly a dictatorship, and the press there generally enjoys higher standards of journalism than the "just publish it and damn the consequences" ethos of the US press.
Posted by: Obelisk1 at July 9, 2008 2:25 PM
As a lawyer, I have great respect for the bulk of both English common law and equity, but I also have to note that we colonials have improved here and there on some English legal precepts. The famous John Peter Zenger trial from the 1730s is a case in point, whereby truth was established as an absolute defense to any charge of defamation.
Now, I'm not privy in any detail to the development of British law up to the present time, though I am generally aware that it is much easier to sustain a charge of libel or slander in Britain than it is here in America, but it appears from this Ehrenfeld case that the Zenger trial from over two hundred and fifty years ago is still lost upon the British legal tradition.
at July 9, 2008 2:30 PM
Looks like Youtube has already made this unavailable. I couldn't watch it, anyhow.
Posted by: former liberal WF at July 9, 2008 3:13 PM
The YouTube link is working fine for me. I'm going to watch it at home, after work. I've got an Iranian and a Muslim (I think, he doesn't eat bacon) Armenian across the hall - No good reasong to let them know that I despise their Islamic idealogy - not at work. Think I'll take in a couple more episodes of "Sands of Passion" while I'm at it.
It boggles my mind how U.K. and Canukistan continue to prosecute American authors for libel and slander over material published in the U.S.
Sadly, it's nearing the time we must consider these two to be Islamic countries because they have bent so far over to appease their Muslim minority populations. The U.K. and Canada are being "thighed" if not worse.
at July 9, 2008 6:30 PM
This explains a lot of PC activity in the UK. The police, MI, and politicians may be pressed by higher ups to be diversity sensitive because ultimately big money is involved. I just wonder - what all Mahfouz might be funding in the UK.
Posted by: Cinder at July 9, 2008 6:35 PM
Sadly, it's nearing the time we must consider these two to be Islamic countries because they have bent so far over to appease their Muslim minority populations. The U.K. and Canada are being "thighed" if not worse.
Posted by: Richard
--
Good, Then we can finally invade the place, throw out the Mos and add a few stars to the stripes..
The libs can howl that we're fighting a War for oil once again. No, we're just bringing Democracy to Canada and throwing out the islamonazis from Missisauga.
//sarc OFF
Posted by: Ummah Gummah at July 10, 2008 1:18 AM
Just noticed something peculiar. A search of three leading internet used book sellers, abebooks, alibris and biblio found absolutely no copies available for sale of Collins' and Burr's "Alms for Jihad", the book over which the Cambridge University Press had to pulp, 'pologise and pay up.
To Mafhouz of course.
Either he is buying up copies as they come on the market, or libraries and discerning buyers around the world have grabbed them, or nobody is interested in selling what few copies there are, or...?
An earlier summary of some of the issues is at
http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/4248
at July 10, 2008 2:12 AM
Posted by MBR:
Either he [Mafhouz] is buying up copies as they come on the market, or libraries and discerning buyers around the world have grabbed them, or nobody is interested in selling what few copies there are, or...?
Then he's going to have to buy a lot of copies. Amazon has the updated paperback for $10. I just put it in my shopping cart.
Posted by: Richard at July 10, 2008 12:29 PM
Thanks, Richard. But I was referring to "Alms for Jihad", not "Funding Evil", which is where your link leads.
Don't worry, both Roger Kimball and Stanley Kurtz also get them mixed during the first panel presentation to the April conference, Free Speech in an Age of Jihad.
Conference downloads in mp3 format can be found at
http://www.newcriterion.com/webcasts.cfm?page=1
(the second panel includes Robert Spencer)
Posted by: MBR at July 10, 2008 5:52 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)