<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN"> <html><head><style type="text/css"></style><title>Re: [lbo-talk] Genocide, Holocaust</title></head><body> <div>At 2:55 PM +0800 3/6/03, Grant Lee wrote:</div> <div><br></div> <blockquote type="cite" cite> in your own interests --- I suggest you are more</blockquote> <blockquote type="cite" cite>careful in what you say to those who _are_ rich and/or powerful.</blockquote> <div><br></div> <div>As I wrote to a rich lawyer who recently accused me of libelling him, and threatened to take legal action: "Go ahead, make my day." ;-) He took offense when I drew attention to some inconsistencies in his pleadings in a court action in which he was representing my local council.</div> <div><br></div> <div>You don't quite understand the legal technicalities of defamation in this country, but that is no criticism, almost no-one does. In any event I am as poor as a church-mouse (as they say). This means that, under the ancient legal doctrine of 'you can't get blood from a stone' I am totally invulnerable to civil action of such kinds. Barring a re-instatement of the debtors prison that is. If you don't believe me, get a second opinion.</div> <div><br></div> <div>Anyway, you are wrong and I am right. Your interpretation of the genocide convention is untenable.</div> <div><br></div> <div>Bill Bartlett</div> <div>Bracknell Tas</div> <div><br></div> <div>PS: However, according to a recent court ruling:<font face="Lucida Grande" size="-3" color="#000000"> http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2001/305.html [Gutnick v Dow Jones & Co Inc [2001] VSC 305 (28 August 2001)]</font> poor old Doug might actually be vulnerable to legal action for publishing defamatory remarks. Of course you would need to show that you had suffered damage in this country, which might be something of a hurdle unless you have a reputation here.</div> </body> </html>