Our fight, too
Editon
Re: I^lhbridKo vs Pressler ("Lible trial ncaring end," Wi//-letin, Dec. 5):
"In (iL'nnany they (xinie first for the CommuniHts and I didn't speak up fx'cxiiiM! I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews and I didn't s/yeak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then thy came for the Trade Unionists and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics and I didn't speak up btuausi! I wasn't a Catholic.
Then they came for me and by that time no one was left to s/x-ak up."
- Pastor Martin Niemoeller
The lack of coverage, attention and interest in the current "libel case" involving Dr. Lethbridge is both saddening and frightening. The court is not just hearing arguments concerning the interpretation of law. The interpretation of history is also in dispute...Jewish history.
This is not just his fight, it is ours as well.
Jonathan Bamett Vancouver
Support for Lautens
Edinir
With respect to Trevor Lautens' response (Bulletin, Dec. 5,) I wish to add my voice to lend unequivocal support to Mr. Lautens. Only someone totally unfamiliar with local media personalities would confuse Mr. Lautens' unmistakably conservative opinions with anti-Semitism. For your edification, a Jewish premier convened the formal opening of a sitting of the provincial legislature on Yom Kippur. Does Mr. Caulfield seriously suggest the Sun should not publish anything of a specific Jewish interest on that day?
Irvine E. Epstein Vancouver
A dire threat
Editor
In recent weeks, your newsroom has been supplied with dozens of pages of background material and of repoits by attendees of the riveting and dramatic testimony at the libel trial, Pressler vs. Lethbridge. Yet.the
Bulk-tin has only at tlic end of tlie trial published, with obvious i-e-liiclanco, wiiat can he at lx,>sl be described as an uninformative, tepid account of this momentous case ("Lilx'l trial nearing end," Bu//Wi/i,Dec.5).
The various complaints against Doug Collins, which have been extensively covered in the Bulletin, pale into insignifiaincc compared to the consequences of the Lethbridge case. Many legal experts view this trial as posing potentially, more than any other in the history of Canadian jurisprudence, a dire threat to human rights organizations (e.g. B'nai Brith, Canadian Jewish Congress, the Committee for Racial Justice, etc.) and minority-advocacy organizations.
Dr. Lethbridge has virtually single-handedly, and with considerable danger to himself, been countering a mushrooming of anti-Semitism and extreme right-wing activity in the B.C. Interior. Some of the persons he opposes are suing him for libel.
Whether or not the suit against him is successful, its vety existence has already had a chilling effect on the operation of human rights groups. I personally know of one instance where a human rights organization in B.C. cancelled, 12 hours before it was due to go to press, the publication of a book exposing hate. They feared that they - like Lethbridge - would be sued for libel, even though they knew that every claim in that book was demonstrably true. (Perhaps, too, the extreme caution, indeed vacu-ousness, of the Bulletin's article is further evidence of the crippling effect this trial is having on the reporting of racist activity in B.C.)
Ms. Staley mistakenly reports that Ben Dayson and Shirley Bamett, as individuals, are raising funds for Mr. Lethbridge's defence. Mr. Dayson's and Mrs. Bamett's tireless efforts are among those of a team of persons. The hastily oiTganized emergency effort to raise funds is sponsored and unanimously endorsed by the executive board of B'nai Brith Lion's Gate Vancouver Lodge and by the Board of Directors of the Zikaron Society, a non-sectarian human-rights oi-ganization having status as a registered charity-Prof. Norman Swartz Chair, Vancouver B'nai Brith Holocaust-education and Anti-defamation Committee
President, Hie Zikaron Remembrance and Tolerance Society, Bumaby
Canadian Jewish Congress explains Collins' complaint
MARK S. WEINTRAUB SPECIAL TO THE JEWISH BULLETIN
In response to the letters to the editor and articles regarding the Collins' Human Ri^iUs Tribunal decision, Canadian Jewish Congress, Pacific region (CJC) would like to remind Bulletin readers of some of the background to the complaint.
CJC and others unsuccessfully attempted to persuade the editors and publishers of the North Shore News that Mr. Collins' disparaging columns wore dangerously close to the expression of blatant racism and as such constituted irresponsible journalism. The North Shore News rebuffed any meaningful communication. Since the North Shore News had no interest in either meaningful dialogue or providing balance, at least one complaint before the Press Council was filed. This resulted in a mild censure. However, the North Shore News continued to proclaim Mr. Collins' unfettered "right" to express his "opinions." Additionally, certain North Shore residents and well-established community groups attempted a boycott. Let there be no misunderstanding then; escalating responses were taken, including "quiet diplomacy" which got us nowhere.
We know that those within the media usually engage in a degree of self-imposed restraint For the most part, the print media holds in check the more grotesque expressions of the human mind and editors simply refuse to permit publication of the obscene, the deliberately insulting or the irrational. The North Shore News exercised none of the typical editorial constraints.
Peter Speck, the paper's publisher, now complains about the legal bill and the "chill" imposed on further publications. Perhaps he should have given more consideration to the consequences of ignoring the non-adversarial forums which were made available to him including a mediate ed agi-eement prior to the hearing. By flirting with racist ideology, the North Shore News played chicken with legislation which it knew had some chance of ptissing constitutional muster. Had the North Shore News exercised even a modicum of prior self-restraint and had the Press
Council and otlier members of the media expressed moral condemnation, tlie tribunal hearing may not have been necessary. Had the iVor//i Shore News the grace to have admitted the anti- Semitic nature of the column, the entire hearing could have been avoided.
Congress took advantage of a provision of the Human Rights Code which is far from extreme. It insists only that citizens, by reason of their race, religion or other "identification" referred to in the statute, be free from contemptuous assaults. Our law of libel and slander attempts to achieve a balance between freedom of expression and the protection of an individual's reputation from defamation. The provision CJC relied upon is in effect a group libel protection. Few freedoms are absolute. This was conceded at the tribunal by all participants.
CJC took the position that pj«-ticulariy in the public domain, not every twisted meandering of the human mind ought to be protected for dissemination in a civilized society. For example, we have a consensus in our society that obscene language has no place in the mainstream press. CJC takes the position that anti-Semitism is as loathsome as proscribed four letter words. Tlie fact that anti-Semitism attempts to clothe itself in the form of an "idea" or "opinion" does not change its essential character.
Mr. Speck denied that Mr. Collins is an anti-Semite. The tribunal found in fact that the column and others written by him were anti-Semitic. This is per-
haps its most important factual finding by an objective arbiter. The decision therefore afiirmed our overall assessment of the column — Holocaust revisionism plays upon the classic anti-Semitic accusations against the Jews as a greedy Rix)up conspiring to harm non-.Jews.
"To us, the i.sHue of "fixtHlom of speech" was a red herring. The issue here for C.J(' was the right of our society to have its Jewish community be free of insult, mocking and derision in a newspaper delivered to the doorsteps of so many North Shore hou.seholds.
There is no published manual for the perfect answer to counter expressioas of anti-Semitism. The best antidote is the niis-ing of children who are able to discern truth from lies and who are therefore inoculated against the disease of racism. CJ(' will continue its efToils working with various educational institutions in this regard. There arc times, however, when more iissertive action is required both to attempt to stop an evil as well as to prevent further acts.
We urge all of you who support our stance against anti-Semitism to communicate to tlie publishers of the North Shore News that freedom of expression is a precious right which ought not be shamelessly abused through the publication of anti-Semiti.sm.i !
Marit S. WaMmib Ls vice-chair of Canadian Jewish Congn'ss, Pacific region.
□
SendtcxEdtlD^JeM^ Suiie203-873Beettya, Vancouver, \/6B2M6 Fax:689-1525 E-mail: jbecMoi«8tar.ca
Letters sh(3ijld be brief. ro more than 250vAX(Js, ard co^ full riarrie arKJ aclckBss d the vvrner ard a (daytime phc^
Letters may be edited for space and clarity.