The Threat.

[ngb1066]

Perhaps he was just responding to the tone of the correspondent. He isn't their best friend. Perhaps he was simply being polite.

Perhaps.

[Jane]

That is certainly one view of this, but there are other possibilities.

There are indeed and much will depend on what the correspondent said in their introductory communication. What the reply appears to be is generic. One wonders if it may have been a "round robin". I note that he says he receives "hundreds" of emails. True? Wishful thinking? or a reason/an excuse for not taking it further?

[nugnug]

in the message the authruitys are trying to get the back banned but they dont know whats in it.

now if they dont whats in it how could they get it banned and why would they want to.

[Jane]

in the message the authruitys are trying to get the back banned but they dont know whats in it.

now if they dont whats in it how could they get it banned and why would they want to.

Nugs, as I'm not "the authorities" I can't answer for them because I don't know what they may THINK they know and I'm not the recipient of any information they may have..................nor do I have any knowledge of the source, all of which are variables which need consideration.

[guest7363]

in the message the authruitys are trying to get the back banned but they dont know whats in it.

now if they dont whats in it how could they get it banned and why would they want to.

He might mean the book has been challenged not banned, cannot think of many books banned before publication? Could it be someone challenged certain parts of the book?

[nugnug]

to get a book banned you need a legal reason and if you don't know whats in the book how can you find a legal reason.

[Jane]

He might mean the book has been challenged not banned, cannot think of many books banned before publication? Could it be someone challenged certain parts of the book?

Justice, that sounds reasonable. We're not talking about Salmun Rushdie here, are we and I very much doubt that there's anything in it which will threaten National security.

[guest7363]

to get a book banned you need a legal reason and if you don't know whats in the book how can you find a legal reason.

At a guess he would have to get certain peoples permission before he could write about them? He would then have to tell them what he would be writing?

[nugnug]

you dont need anybodys permission to write about them if you did nothing critical would ever get written.

[guest7363]

you dont need anybodys permission to write about them if you did nothing critical would ever get written.

How come then, that newspapers and authors get sued then?

[nugnug]

its up to the person who feels defamed to sue the newspaper is not obliged to get there permission to print anything.

nggb dident give the express permission to write about him neither did Jackie but they still did.

[lookout]

Which is why I'm going to ask about any apology coming forthwith for having their names dragged through the mire. If I'd been the recipient of such a letter then I'd have immediately got in touch with the two who were named to offer my apologies. It's got to be the done thing,hasn't it ?

[guest7363]

its up to the person who feels defamed to sue the newspaper is not obliged to get there permission anything.

nggb dident give the express permission to write about him neither did Jackie but they still did.

I honestly don't know how it works, as you said before you have to be careful esp with the Leverson inquiry, maybe this has made people think a bit more what they write?  Is mentioning Ngb and  Jackie liabel and not mentioning full names? Not sure.

[nugnug]

well what i cant see is that the establishment would try and ban his book. i mean banning a book is a big step.

how would they justify banning it.

[Patti]

well what i cant see is that the establishment would try and ban his book. i mean banning a book is a big step.

how would they justify banning it.

I've just had a thought, I might be wrong. But there is a barring of news reports on Jeremy here in England, could that same barr be affecting his book?