Touchy!
It seems poor Stephen is a sensitive soul, hurt by false accusations. Here is the latest “press release” from the CV site:
The statement in The Times yesterday: “Mr Green … claims that Hindus are wicked” is completely untrue.
The statement by Rhidian Brook in Thought for the Day on BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme yesterday “Christian Voice damning the cast of Jerry Springer the Opera” is also untrue.
At no time have I said or written that Hindus are wicked. They are no more wicked than anyone else. We are all sinners.
Nor have I pronounced damnation on the cast of Jerry Springer the Opera. It is the place of God Himself to make the final judgment, not me (thank God).
I shall be consulting our lawyers tomorrow with a view to taking action against The Times, the BBC and Mr Brook for those statements, which were clearly intended to bring me and Christian Voice into disrepute.
The boy really keeps a close eye on his press, doesn’t he? It’s almost as if he is obsessed with his own image…oh, wait.
If he’s that worried about his image he could start by having a shave.
Hes damned if he does and damned if he doesnt.
Had he left the misquote on Hindus unchecked, he would be criticised for his views. If he corrects it, he is criticised for being thin-skinned.
What is the third option that he should have taken? (Direct answer, please!!) :o)
There’s a world of difference between ‘corrects’ and ‘threatens legal action over’, though, Chris, isn’t there? Had Green said, “I have never said that Hindus are wicked, merely that Hindu religion is not of God but is a manifestation of Satan; that Hindusim exalts created things and debases man to the level of a sacrificial victim; that the social system based upon its teachings is oppressive and murderous and that its treatment of women and children, endorsed by its scriptures and accepted by Hindu society, is barbaric and wicked,” that’d be fine. It’s the self-righteous “I’ll be talking to our lawyers” (I assume he had a mouse in his pocket when he was speaking or something).
Plenty of people sue because the media are erratic and unscrupulous. How does that make them self-righteous? He’s standing up for the truth against misinformation. Is misinformation better than truth?
Actually, very few people make threats to resort to lawyers as a first resort. Normally people who have been misquoted write to the newspaper requesting (or demanding, depending on how wronged they feel) an apology and a correction be printed. That course of action would’ve been more temperate and appropriate
Yes, it would. Though I often chuckle when I see the apology for an front page article nestling in a tiny box on page 14 where no-one will see it.