Peter Mandelson Nat Rothschild: The Mail strikes a blow for freedom of the Press

February 11th, 2012

FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda

By
Daily Mail Comment

Last updated at 9:09 PM on 10th February 2012

Two years ago, this newspaper unearthed worrying details of how Nat Rothschild had, in 2005, arranged for then EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson to spend a lavish weekend in the company of the Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska.

At the time, Mr Deripaska – a metals tycoon, whose business interests are intertwined with those of the billionaire financier Mr Rothschild – was waiting to discover if the EU was going to raise or (as turned out to be the case) lower trade tariffs on aluminium imports.

Clearly, it’s a matter of great public interest that Mr Rothschild should have placed Lord Mandelson in the orbit of a man who stood to gain or lose significantly from EU decisions.

Libel action: Nathaniel Rothschild, left, brought the case against the Daily Mail over an article about a meeting he arranged between Lord Mandelson, right and Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska

At the very least, it raised legitimate questions over whether Lord Mandelson – who enjoyed Mr Deripaska’s ‘luxurious and generous’ hospitality, including a flight on his private jet – was adhering to the strict rules of impartiality required of a holder of high public office.

Mr Rothschild’s response was to seek ‘very substantial’ libel damages from the Mail for reporting his role in arranging the meeting, claiming that he had been portrayed as a ‘puppet master’.

Yesterday, at the High Court, Mr Justice Tugendhat found in favour of this newspaper, saying Mr Rothschild had not been ‘entirely candid’ in his evidence.

Crucially, the judge ruled his conduct had ‘foreseeably brought Lord Mandelson’s public office and personal integrity into disrepute and exposed him to accusations of conflict of interest and gave rise to reasonable grounds to suspect Lord Mandelson of improper discussions with Mr Deripaska’.

While we are delighted that our journalism – and the risks we took in defending it – have been vindicated, it should be noted that, had the Mail lost, we could have incurred costs of more than £1million, which are beyond the means of most newspapers.

The case should serve as a reminder, at a time when newspapers are under attack, facing accusations of invading privacy, that the rich and powerful regularly use the law to prevent legitimate scrutiny of their activities.

We can only hope that – as Lord Justice Leveson’s inquiry considers the balance between privacy and freedom of expression – the chilling effect on free speech that court cases like this exert, and the risks which journalists take in pursuit of the truth, are borne in mind.

The freedom of the Press to carry out investigations, expose wrongdoing and campaign for justice, as the Mail did so passionately over Stephen Lawrence, is an essential part of our democracy.

We forgo it at our peril.

Valuing Christianity

It was a dark day for anybody worried by the way Christianity – the dominant faith of this country for almost 2,000 years – is being increasingly pushed to the margins of British society.

In two judgments, the courts ruled it was unlawful for a devout Christian couple to refuse two gay men the right to share a double room in their own BB.

Then, disturbingly, the High Court banned the saying of prayers at the start of council meetings – siding with an atheist ex-councillor who claimed to be ‘embarrassed’ by the tradition, despite not being obliged to take part.

The most worrying aspect is how, once again, the courts consider the rights of Christians to be less important than those of every other section of society.

Yet, as Lord Carey writes on these pages, Christianity has helped to shape virtually every facet of British life – from morality and literature to education and art.

It’s high time our current church leaders and politicians showed the spine to defend it.

Here’s what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts,
or debate this issue live on our message boards.

The comments below have not been moderated.