Julie Burchill forced to apologise for twitter comments , and pay out a fat wedge .

[marty21]

Julie Burchill agrees to pay Ash Sarkar 'substantial damages' in libel case

Columnist apologises to journalist, acknowledging social media posts included ‘racist and misogynist’ comments

www.theguardian.com

Burchill basically accused Ash Sarkar of various nasty stuff , such as worshipping a paedo ,and encouraged a nasty social media pile on , enthusiastically supported by various cunts.

Now she has to publicly apologise, and pay a fat wedge (undisclosed amount) to Ash Sarkar.

I know Ash Sarkar gets stick , some may be warranted , and she doles it out too. This was a nasty pile on . Burchill got cancelled as a result, lost her publishing deal (A book on the woke ) but this legal settlement actually un-cancels her (another publisher has offered to publish the woke book ) .

 

[Santino]

Ironic that she referred to nonce-apologist Rod Liddle in her apology.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Is the baying mob getting a book deal cancelled not on par with burning books?

 

[marty21]

Is the baying mob getting a book deal cancelled not on par with burning books?

No , the publisher decided to cancel the contract, the book wasn't banned, it wasn't actually a book yet. It will be published by another publisher. Interesting that your take on this was the canceled book deal.

 

[Pickman's model]

Julie Burchill agrees to pay Ash Sarkar 'substantial damages' in libel case

Columnist apologises to journalist, acknowledging social media posts included ‘racist and misogynist’ comments

www.theguardian.com

Burchill basically accused Ash Sarkar of various nasty stuff , such as worshipping a paedo ,and encouraged a nasty social media pile on , enthusiastically supported by various cunts.

Now she has to publicly apologise, and pay a fat wedge (undisclosed amount) to Ash Sarkar.

I know Ash Sarkar gets stick , some may be warranted , and she doles it out too. This was a nasty pile on . Burchill got cancelled as a result, lost her publishing deal (A book on the woke ) but this legal settlement actually un-cancels her (another publisher has offered to publish the woke book ) .

Turned out nice again

 

[marty21]

Ironic that she referred to nonce-apologist Rod Liddle in her apology.

That's what kicked it off , Ash Sarkar referring to an article where he admitted he couldn't be a teacher as it would lead to noncery.

 

[Orang Utan]

Ironic that she referred to nonce-apologist Rod Liddle in her apology.

I think apologist is superfluous. He’s a self-confessed nonce

 

[nogojones]

Is the baying mob getting a book deal cancelled not on par with burning books?

Was there a "baying mob"? Or did the publishers just think publishing a author who made edgy, racist comments and didn't have the foresight to realise that calling someone a peado on Twitter was a bit of a liability?

 

[Combustible]

Is the baying mob getting a book deal cancelled not on par with burning books?

There was me thinking that the baying mob were the ones sending racist abuse, and threats of rape and murder to a female journalist, yet for some reason that doesn't seem to faze you.

 

[ska invita]

Im dead curious how much it has cost her.

 

[ska invita]

The book has found another publisher by the way

 

[not-bono-ever]

He’s a lot off things and his spoor is pretty easy to find

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Pretty vile stuff in there, but it's also worrying that it's apparently not acceptable to call Mohammad a paedophile. A woman was convicted of blasphemy in Austria in 2011 for doing that, and her appeal to the European court failed. The reasoning was that the conviction 'served the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace'. Special pleading for religion.

Calling Muhammad paedophile ‘not protected by free speech’

 

[Sasaferrato]

No , the publisher decided to cancel the contract, the book wasn't banned, it wasn't actually a book yet. It will be published by another publisher. Interesting that your take on this was the canceled book deal.

No time for Burchill, she is a tedious troll.

 

[killer b]

Pretty vile stuff in there, but it's also worrying that it's apparently not acceptable to call Mohammad a paedophile. A woman was convicted of blasphemy in Austria in 2011 for doing that, and her appeal to the European court failed. The reasoning was that the conviction 'served the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace'. Special pleading for religion.

Calling Muhammad paedophile ‘not protected by free speech’

another advantage to brexit there then: we're now free to call Mohammed a paedophile.

 

[Pickman's model]

Pretty vile stuff in there, but it's also worrying that it's apparently not acceptable to call Mohammad a paedophile. A woman was convicted of blasphemy in Austria in 2011 for doing that, and her appeal to the European court failed. The reasoning was that the conviction 'served the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace'. Special pleading for religion.

Calling Muhammad paedophile ‘not protected by free speech’

There is a difference between the eu's european court and the council of europe's european court of human rights.

 

[NoXion]

Isn't the ECHR separate from the EU?

"preserving religious peace" my arse!

 

[Pickman's model]

another advantage to brexit there then: we're now free to call Mohammed a paedophile.

Littlebabyjesus was wrong to mention the european court. The UK remains within the jurisdiction of the european court of human rights to which the austrian case actually went

 

[danny la rouge]

Pretty vile stuff in there, but it's also worrying that it's apparently not acceptable to call Mohammad a paedophile. A woman was convicted of blasphemy in Austria in 2011 for doing that, and her appeal to the European court failed. The reasoning was that the conviction 'served the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace'. Special pleading for religion.

Calling Muhammad paedophile ‘not protected by free speech’

Aisha was 6 or 7 when they married and the marriage was consummated when she was 9 or 10, and he was 53. I'm not sure what the word for that is other than paedophilia: she was prepubescent by any standard.

 

[bimble]

good. I don't understand who it is who wants to read her pointless shite and why she still gets paid. She's like a guardian-ish version of whats her name, that one off the apprentice. Her 'i love the jews' phase was especially painful.

 

[danny la rouge]

good. I don't understand who it is who wants to read her pointless shite and why she still gets paid. She's like a guardian-ish version of whats her name, that one off the apprentice.

Alan Sugar.

 

[Santino]

Alan Sugar.

That's Sir Sugar to you

 

[8ball]

Pretty vile stuff in there, but it's also worrying that it's apparently not acceptable to call Mohammad a paedophile. A woman was convicted of blasphemy in Austria in 2011 for doing that, and her appeal to the European court failed. The reasoning was that the conviction 'served the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace'. Special pleading for religion.

Calling Muhammad paedophile ‘not protected by free speech’

Careful, now.

 

[danny la rouge]

That's Sir Sugar to you

Lorde, I believe.

 

[Pickman's model]

good. I don't understand who it is who wants to read her pointless shite and why she still gets paid. She's like a guardian-ish version of whats her name, that one off the apprentice. Her 'i love the jews' phase was especially painful.

If I thought she might libel me I would read her site assiduously.

 

[Santino]

Lorde, I believe.

Sir Lorde? I don't think so.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

another advantage to brexit there then: we're now free to call Mohammed a paedophile.

I know you're being facetious, but it's not quite that way around. The European court didn't prosecute. It just didn't rule a prosecution illegal. We have our own problems with the interpretation of laws concerning religious hate speech, which can include some (imo) dodgy rulings.

 

[danny la rouge]

Sir Lorde? I don't think so.

Lorde Lorde Lorde Sir Sugar, I think.

 

[Pickman's model]

Lorde Lorde Lorde Sir Sugar, I think.

of shite hart lane

 

[Pickman's model]

I know you're being facetious, but it's not quite that way around. The European court didn't prosecute. It just didn't rule a prosecution illegal. We have our own problems with the interpretation of laws concerning religious hate speech, which can include some (imo) dodgy rulings.

The European court didn't consider it at all