Ehrenfeld v. Bin Mahfouz (CM)

Rober Spencer writes:

If Saudis or others who have indeed supported the global jihad are able cover their tracks using British libel laws to silence investigators, the only winners are the jihadists. "The British legal and political leadership's constant appeasement of the jihadists," says Miss Ehrenfeld, "facilitated the rise of terrorism." She sees consequences for both the United States and Britain in her legal struggle: "My fight against bin Mahfouz is not only to prevent the extension of that influence here — to defend our First Amendment from British laws. My success here would deter other jihadists from using the British courts to silence U.S. writers and publishers especially since it would — in similar situations — render U.K. court decisions useless."

This case has huge implications for freedom of speech. So why are the usual civil rights groups not stepping up to the plate?

More here.

Comments

[davod]

How does the British libel law differ from the US law.