Do you feel you can express yourself or is there a gagging order on society?

[SteveT]

?

As if society in general has had a gagging order inflicted upon it.

For example if you mention immigration it is as if one imagines a big hushing sound nearby.

Over population is also forbidden.

Bullying in the work place, or at school, in the park by ne'er do wells and their bruiser dogs.

If you can think of anymore examples you are allowed to put them down on this thread.

[Brendan]

Yes there is.

Just don't mention it ok.

[SeanMacGabhann]

It's not the Lounge Brendan...

[mockney piers]

Too many damn lizards in this country if you ask me!

[SeanMacGabhann]

Back to the topic

Why do you think there is a gagging order on society - most of the topics you mention are routinely discussed on here, on the news, radio phone ins etc. Where is the gagging order?

If you mean you aren't allowed say certain things - say for example, "I don't like immigrants" then that is not only blind prejudice but historically scary

If you say you think they are having a negative effect on the country, you have to do better than just say that - you have to engage in a debate. You have to ask are the English themselves immigrants anywhere. Do they have to be repatriated to England. How would that work? etc...

But a gagging order - don't be so hysterical

[HAL9000]

I realise this isn't exactly what SteveT had in mind but the Government has a powerful array of gagging orders at its disposal. According to 'Freedom, the Individual and the Law' (Penguin Law - 1991) by Harry Street (Author) and Geoffrey Robertson (Editor), the following legislations are used to gag individuals and the press (although some may have been amended or rescinded since its publication):

Treason

Criminal Libel

Interim Injunction

Malicious Falsehood

Contempt of Court

Breach of Copyright

Obscenity

Conspiracy Offences

Official Secrets Act 1911, s1

Public Interest Immunity Certificates

D-Notices

Blasphemy

Sedition

A D-Notice was served in relation to myself in the mid-80s that is still in force, as far as I know, so I can?t talk about it ? except to say it was probably the most bizarre thing that ever happened to me and really opened my eyes to the level of rampant corruption within the government and judicial system (of England and Wales).

[macroban]

DORA sits in the background ready to be introduced within a couple of hours.

Orders in Council can also do interesting stuff.

[macroban]

HAL9000

There is a footnote on page 521 of Nicholas Wilkinson's "Secrecy And The Media: The Official History Of The United Kingdom's D-Notice System" which was published this year which says "The full text of [...] 1982 [...] notices is available to the public from the DA-Notice Secretary's Office [...]."

You might like to check when the 1983 notices will be available.

MacRoban

[SteveT]

Hal9000 wrote:- really opened my eyes to the level of rampant corruption within the government and judicial system (of England and Wales).

I think they do not bear scrutiny. Never speak the truth about them because they might lock you up on a trumped up .............

I am sorry father I cannot tell a truth!

A quote by George Wishington.

[bignumber5]

I suspect that this may end up rehashing ground that we, the EDF, have covered well in our own little universe, but are we confusing a gagging order on certain topics with views on them that are often just not pleasant or acceptable to the members of the "society" in question?

I mean, gagging order implies Stalin-esque censorship on freedoms as speech with serious adverse consequences for raising a topic, and that's one thing - being colloquially told to shut up by a consensus of people who disagree with your viewpoint is quite another.

[SteveT]

succinctly put bignumber5.

[Jeremy]

BN5, I believe you are correct.

There is certainly not a "gagging order" on immigration and as SMG says, it is a staple of talk radio.

But when some people start talking about immigration, sometimes some rather unpleasant views come to the surface.

[LegalEagle-ish]

If it's the only thing some people want to talk about on a regular basis then I suppose people would wonder if this person or persons might have some kind of malicious agenda. Further, as incitement to racial hatred is illegal - I would imagine that the person or persons so obsessed would be asked to drop it. Just guessing mind.

[HAL9000]

macroban Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You might like to check when the 1983 notices will

> be available.

I'll check it out - thanks. I'm hoping that the official files will be released under the thirty-year rule in due course but suspect they'll remain sealed for as long as those involved are still alive - including me.

[Santerme]

HAL9000 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I realise this isn't exactly what SteveT had in

> mind but the Government has a powerful array of

> gagging orders at its disposal. According to

> 'Freedom, the Individual and the Law' (Penguin Law

> - 1991) by Harry Street (Author) and Geoffrey

> Robertson (Editor), the following legislations are

> used to gag individuals and the press (although

> some may have been amended or rescinded since its

> publication):

>

> Treason

> Criminal Libel

> Interim Injunction

> Malicious Falsehood

> Contempt of Court

> Breach of Copyright

> Obscenity

> Conspiracy Offences

> Official Secrets Act 1911, s1

> Public Interest Immunity Certificates

> D-Notices

> Blasphemy

> Sedition

>

> A D-Notice was served in relation to myself in the

> mid-80s that is still in force, as far as I know,

> so I can?t talk about it ? except to say it was

> probably the most bizarre thing that ever happened

> to me and really opened my eyes to the level of

> rampant corruption within the government and

> judicial system (of England and Wales).

My understanding of DA notices are that they are advisory and not binding.

You seek advice on whether the information is likely to be sensitive from the secretariat, but you cannot be gagged by them.

[HAL9000]

Santerme Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> My understanding of DA notices are that they are

> advisory and not binding.

>

> You seek advice on whether the information is

> likely to be sensitive from the secretariat, but

> you cannot be gagged by them.

I'm not an expert. My understanding is that a D-Notice is usually issued to the media; supposedly to suppress publication of defence related issues. I don't know of any cases where it hasn't been effective in that respect.

[Santerme]

Name: Organisation: Nominated By...

Hugh Carnegy Executive Editor

The Financial Times

NPA

James Green Security Publisher

Jane's Information Group

PPA

Edmund Curran Editor

The Belfast Telegraph

NS

Robin Esser Executive Managing Editor

Daily Mail

NPA

Jonathan Grun Editor

Press Association

PA

John Battle Head of Compliance

Independent Television News

ITN

John McLellan Editor

The Scotsman

SDNS

Michael Jermey Director of News, CUrrent Affairs and Sport

ITV

ITV

James MacManus Executive Director

News International Newspapers Ltd

NPA

David Jordan Director Editorial Policy and Standards

BBC

BBC

Paul Horrocks Editor

Manchester Evening News

NS

Bob Satchwell Executive Director

Society of Editors

SOE

Simon Juden Chief Executive

The (Book) Publishers Association

PA

D J Collins Director, Communications and

Public Affairs - Europe, Middle East and Africa

Google

Jonathan Shephard Chief Executive

Periodical Publishers Association

Current media members of the DA notice committee.

The Vice Chair is Simon Bucks from Sky News

[Tony.London Suburbs]

There IS, obviously, the equivalent of a "gagging order" on certain organisations.

The Metropolitan Police, for example, used to be able to publish the full details of all street offences ( muggings,basically) in all 33 London Boroughs up to around 5 years ago. Descriptions were given by the victim(s)in each case, as far as possible, as to the perpetrator(s), but now not only are these figures not published, but no access can be gained to the figures for the 1990's etc, as far as I can ascertain.

These figures were broken down as far as the ethnicity of each perpetrator and, also, each victim.

The figures for each recent year must be recorded within the Met. but they are no longer be available for public scrutiny.

[Huguenot]

Well, blow me away, TLS tries to get ethnicity of criminals into the debate shocker.

Mate, you just didn't need that middle sentence. Your post was interesting, engaging (even likeable) until you tried to make it about race.

Don't you get it?

This becomes a case in point I suppose. Am I gagging TLS?

In the wider debate 'rampant corruption' is a silly way to describe the UK. It's evidently not the best, but the coverage given to transgressions (for example police malpractice) must prove that it's pretty open here. Have you never been anywhere else in the world?

[macroban]

Standing DA-Notices are published - see here.

Individual DA-Notices are not.

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Huguenot Wrote:

Well, blow me away, TLS tries to get ethnicity of criminals into the debate shocker.

Mate, you just didn't need that middle sentence. Your post was interesting, engaging (even likeable) until you tried to make it about race.

Thats because H. the reason given for rhe cessation of publication of said crime figures was in the "interest of Community Relations".

So, i.m.o., it is relevant to my general point.

[Huguenot]

Only in your head is it relevant TLS, because you're obsessed with race.

The question was about gagging of society, and your response is: 'Yes I've been gagged because I can't have a go at people on a race basis for crime'.

I'm afraid Jeremy's assertion that 'some rather unpleasant views may come to the surface' has rather taken us by storm here hasn't it?

There is a difference between 'gagging society', freedom of speech and peddling obnoxious offensive prejudices.

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Huguenot Wrote:

The question was about gagging of society, and your response is: 'Yes I've been gagged because I can't have a go at people on a race basis for crime'.

The gagging aspect is that we are not allowed to see the figures which have been compiled.

Why are those figures deliberately being concealed these days as it will surely be in the "public interest" for them to be published would they not H ?

Or do you agree that if a sector of society is proven to have been the main perpetrators of strret crime beyond any possible degree of "randomness" that these "results" should not be shown to the general public,even in the areas relevant to the crime figures?

That is a gagging order in that it suppresses the truth.

Indeed it would end all thereotical presumptions or assumptions or miscalculations as to who are the main pepetrators and victims of a particular crime by providing true and accurate crime figures!

This could then be extended to all crime whether it be paedophilia, "white-collar" crime etc.

Surely it is best for the true figures to be widely shown as then some progress could be made to rectify or resolve the situation which is, surely, what everyone would want.

[Huguenot]

Sure a great example.

I think the people most pressing for the disclosure of crime figures on a racial basis have absolutely no intention of solving the problem do they?

You, for example TLS, have no intention of using these figures to solve crime issues, because you don't have it within your ability to do so.

What you do have the ability to do is manipulate the data to peddle race hatred, which I'm sure is not your intent. So what do you want it for TLS?

If 'gagging' someone is not lending a meat cleaver to a psychopath then I'm all for it.

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Huguenot Wrote:

Sure a great example.I think the people most pressing for the disclosure of crime figures on a racial basis have

absolutely no intention of solving the problem do they? You, for example TLS, have no intention of using

these figures to solve crime issues, because you don't have it within your ability to do so. What you do have the ability to do is manipulate the data to peddle race hatred, which I'm sure is not your intent. So what do you want it for TLS?

Its because one can use accurate figures, based over a long period of time, to make decisions H.

For example, if "Albanovianakians" lol are found to commit 85% of street crime or paedophilic crimes throughout a large region and I know from figures provided by a very reliable series of sources that these figures are accurate, then I have it within my ability to give my Family the best possible chance of not being a "victim" by living in an area that has few, if any, "Albanovianakians"...

Also more resources or anything thing else that is deemed useful, could be channelled into the right areas ( literally) .

Just because certain figures make many uncomfortable as they might portray certain Groups in a very bad light, should not be sufficient reason for their deliberate disclosure.