Fake News for Big Brother

[Dave Howe]

Tim May wrote:
> Nonsense. Many preachers and televangelists know they are shucking and
> jiving their congregations.
Indeed so. but I believe the ones that do should be arrested for fraudulent
obtaining of funds :)

> The First Amendment does not have an exception clause for "knowingly
> lying."
no, but a lot of commercial law does.

>>> Should a newspaper be prosecuted for publishing a claim that the
>>> Sumerian prediction that Nibiru, aka Planet X, will stop the earth
>>> from rotating on May 15, 2003?
>> Nope. but they should be prosecuted if they front-page splash it as
>> "earth doomed, we have two weeks to live, there is no hope" and
>> fail to mention that it is a religious prediction that the scientific
>> community has a few issues with....
> Nonsense.
They would be in hot water for a number of reasons - probably incitement to
riot at least.
One thing that *does* occur to me - most of the news sources are not free,
at least not here in the uk. I pay to receive even broadcast TV, I pay for
satellite downlink - therefore I am paying for a product (truthful
reporting) and should be able to sue if that isn't the product I get...

> You really believe the Jew propaganda?
Yup. I have visited one of the camps, along with the battlefields of ypres
(ww1). One of the advantages of being in england instead of the US is that
you can make a round trip to these sort of places without having to even
stop overnight...
Denying the holocaust is pretty pointless. it happened, get over it. The
jews got made the scapegoat and whipping post for the economic problems the
germans had at the time - which of course the english had done centuries
beforehand; given how many times the jews were persecuted its not that
suprising they are a bit paranoid as a group now.

> The First Amendment does not contain language about how speech "should
> be accompanied by pretty convincing evidence."
This is of course true - but iirc the First Amendment has to be interpreted
in the light of the "common law rights" it enshrines, not as a simple
one-sentence absolute right; nothing leads me to believe the founders
intended the first amendment to be a shield for those who would hide behind
it for political or financial gain . . . still, I am not an american.