Hypocrite Green asks for goodwill from those he sued
12:48 am - July 4th 2008
| Tweet | Share on Tumblr |
This brightens my day. Fundamentalist campaigner may have to declare bankruptcy as a result of the court case I covered last December. He has apparently asked us licence payers to cover the costs:
in the interests of goodwill and justice
Seriously. This petty little fundamentalist bigot who misused a long outdated law as part of his personal crusade against freedom of expression now wants to be let off the costs of the case in the name of “goodwill”.
No Mr Green, you lost any goodwill when you continued your petty campaign long past any sensible point. You lost our goodwill when you declared your intent to appeal against the ruling in a petty and vindictive manner. You want justice Mr Green?
You’ve got it. Pay up, the justice system demands those who bring frivolous cases pay the costs when they lose. Your own Press Release doesn’t even manage to persuade me:
‘It should be enough for Mark Thompson and Jonathan Thoday that they got away with blasphemy, insulting God and the Lord Jesus Christ, at least in this life. For these rich, powerful men to pursue me into the bankruptcy courts over money I don’t have would be vindictive.’
Both sets of solicitors have also threatened to chase the donors who gave the money for the original action, but it is far from clear that a court would allow that. Even if it did, Green is adamant that he will protect the donors’ identity, even if that puts him in contempt of court.
‘I should go to prison rather than reveal their names, even if I could remember who they were,’ he told both Thompson and Thoday.
It’s no more vindictive than the way you waged your national campaign against the Opera, picketed theatres, threatened charities and called for boycotts of stores, persuading Sainsbury’s and Woolworths to withdraw the DVDs out of fear of protests from your annoying coterie of fellow extremists.
You complain about the money the BBC ‘wastes’ on things you disapprove of (such as a Gaelic TV channel, the digital services, etc) but now want it to waste money covering the costs of your pettiness? No. You brought the case. Time to pay the piper.
For those interested, there’s an online petition and a Facebook group as well.
Cross-posted from my journal by request
| Tweet | Share on Tumblr |  |
Mat Bowles is an occasional contributor to Liberal Conspiracy. He's mostly a house-husband working part-time at a local school, and is based in Calderdale, Yorkshire. A member of the Liberal Democrats, he is 35 and lives with Jennie Rigg. His general interest blog is currently hosted on Dreamwidth and his old political blog is at Not Little England.
· Other posts by MatGB
Story Filed Under: Arts ,Blog ,Religion
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Reader comments
So, you think he’s petty, then?
* smooches *
Great post, sweetcheeks 😉
I do yes, nasty little man. That I like the Opera and think Lee is a pretty good entertainer just fuels the bile as well.
But, y’know, brain not working fully so didn’t notice the 4 separate uses of the word. Ah well, adds emphasis.
Count me in Mat…
…mind you, I figure you knew I’d say that anyway.
From a different perspective, imagine the silly man’s reaction if a Nonbelievers for Green campaign raised the money to pay off his costs.
Ben
Mat, I share your amusement. But there’s one thing I don’t understand: why doesn’t Green just get his imaginary friend in the sky to pay his bills? I’m sure that if he’s as chummy with his imaginary friend as he says he is, this will not be a problem.
I thought it was a pretty shit show and that the BBC made a poor choice in showing it (it wasn’t funny, just controversial). But Green wouldn’t have my support for trying to use a law to reduce freedom of expression when there was a more principled stand available, of opposing the license fee altogether.
Nick, I enjoyed it, and think that, given the controversy, the BBC had a duty to show it as part of it’s PSB remit—until the tour, many of us provincials hadn’t really had a chance to go see it while it was only on in London, and IIRC the tour date local to me where when I was swamped at work and unable to attend.
Obviously, not everyone will enjoy it—it’d be a shockingly dull world if we all had the same tastes.
Personally, I currently have no problem with the licence fee, and get good value out of it now I’m living with enough people to justify it—in the past I have lived without a TV because I didn’t think the licence was worth it.
At some point in the future, post digital switchover, I expect the BBC to go to a subscription model for some of its channels, but for now the benefits massively exceed the costs, and I rather like having several channels not dependent on commercial sponsorship.
Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?
But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, [ye] hypocrites?
Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
And he saith unto them, Whose [is] this image and superscription?
They say unto him, Caesar’s. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.
When they had heard [these words], they marvelled, and left him, and went their way.
— Matthew 22:17-22 KJV
Mark Thompson and his Solicitors should just send the Bailiffs round…
This actually made me smile, thanks for blogging this! And by gum, I must say that when I read it, the words ‘divine justice’ did flash across my mind.
HOW’S IT FEEL, MR. GREEN, EH?
Re:Cabalamat, #5: That’s exactly what I was going to suggest, only less wittily :D.
Yay! The important thing is that he lost, and for such a ridiculous use of the law courts, he deserves to pay costs.
Reactions: Twitter, blogs
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
