Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watdcsu.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!watdcsu!herbie
From: herbie@watdcsu.UUCP (Herb Chong [DCS])
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: Genus II Edition banned in U.S.? (really free speech)
Message-ID: <1372@watdcsu.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 12-May-85 20:49:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: watdcsu.1372
Posted: Sun May 12 20:49:47 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 13-May-85 03:29:55 EDT
References: <451@mnetor.UUCP> <14@aquila.UUCP> <358@unm-cvax.UUCP> <10306@brl-tgr.ARPA> <483@usl.UUCP> <1233@ecsvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: herbie@watdcsu.UUCP (Herb Chong [DCS])
Organization: U of Waterloo
Lines: 58
Summary: 

In article <1233@ecsvax.UUCP> dgary@ecsvax.UUCP (D Gary Grady) writes:
>In Canada (let us remember) it is
>illegal to differ with the official government line concerning certain
>historical events (in particular the Holocaust).

at the risk of more flaming, how did the government enter into this?
the charges were made by a private group.  the wording of the charge
mentioned the Holocaust, but the charge was equivalent to a libel suit
(which happens a lot in the US, i hear).  Zuhndel(sp?) was charged with
publishing information which was known to be false.  if he had singled
out a single person and that person were alive, a libel suit would
probably have resulted instead (and generated a lot less publicity).

>The fact that the
>government's version of history in this instance is undoubtedly true is
>beside the point.  

the government happens in this case to make no statements about history.
historians make statements on history.  responsible historians present
verifiable facts.  the government, through the legal system, decides which
side can present more verifiable facts (evidence) by letting a jury
of people representing the community decide which evidence is stronger.
sound familiar?

>Would you approve of the law in the (admittedly
>unlikely) event that a right-wing government took over Canada and
>promulgated its own version of, say, the history of Quebec?

no, but then the government has never done so before, and is unlikely to
do so in the future because the government does not present any version
of history to anyone, historians do.

>Furthermore, the banning of fruit-loop books claiming that the
>Holocaust was a hoax only serves to bring publicity to a nut group that
>would otherwise be ignored by everyone with an IQ outside the single
>digits.

but lying in public is not to be taken lightly when a group of people
are offended and hurt because of those lies.  libel, slander, and
other such things exist for a purpose, and there is a time and a place
for their proper application.  if i took out an ad in the NY Times and
called you various and sundry names, you would tell me to retract those
statements publicly or be sued (a common thing in the US, i hear) since
dueling is outlawed.  along the way, i could drag your name through the
mud, lying through my teeth every step of the way.  it would be up to
you to prove that i was lying, since i'm innocent until proven guilty.

Zuhndel's primary defense was that he wasn't lying because he actually
believed what he was publishing was true.

Herb Chong...

I'm user-friendly -- I don't byte, I nybble....

UUCP:  {decvax|utzoo|ihnp4|allegra|clyde}!watmath!water!watdcsu!herbie
CSNET: herbie%watdcsu@waterloo.csnet
ARPA:  herbie%watdcsu%waterloo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
NETNORTH, BITNET, EARN: herbie@watdcs, herbie@watdcsu