Regarding the Lawsuit of Falun Gong Practitioners vs. China Press and Sing Tao Daily: Who Should be Protected by the First Amendment to the US Constitution?

On June 6, 2002, Falun Gong practitioners in New York filed a lawsuit against the local China Press and Sing Tao Daily, accusing them of publishing slanderous articles against Falun Gong. I would like to share my views on this matter.

The First Amendment to the US Constitution stresses the protection of the freedoms of speech, religion, press, petition and assembly. The lawyer for the accused cited one case in their defence, which argued how the Washington Post won a lawsuit against the government after it was shut down by the government for revealing military secrets of the Defence Department during the Vietnam War. The following are some comparisons between the two cases:

1. The reason why the Washington Post won the case was because, while it enjoyed freedom of the press, it did not violate other aspects protected by the First Amendment to the US Constitution such as the freedoms of speech, religion, petition and assembly. However, in this case, China Press and Sing Tao Daily used freedom of the press as a means to violate the principle of freedom of belief by viciously attacking the belief of Falun Gong practitioners. Violating the constitution while being protected by it is in essence trampling upon freedom of belief.
2. What the Washington Post reported on were US military secrets that really existed. They did not make them up. The leakage of the secrets was also due to the fact that the Defence Department was not vigilant enough itself. However, reports by China Press and Sing Tao Daily were fabricated lies made up by the Jiang regime by stealthily substituting one thing for another. Falun Gong practitioners did nothing wrong. The reports did not contain any facts, but aimed to attack and to persecute. The Washington Post was telling people facts (even though they were military secrets), whereas China Press and Sing Tao Daily were deceiving their readers, and at the same time violating the principle of truthfulness of the press.
3. The report by the Washington Post was not manipulated by foreign influence, whereas behind these two Chinese newspapers was the intent to support the bloody persecution of people by the Chinese dictator, Jiang Zemin. The slanderous propaganda is the expansion of the brutal persecution overseas and is supported by Jiang and the Chinese consulate.
4. The freedoms protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution are for the American people, not for the mouthpieces of a foreign force in the US. Moreover, the so called freedoms these foreign forces exercise on American soil are in fact trampling on and depriving the freedom of religious beliefs of American citizens, and are totally against the First Amendment to the Constitution. Jiang's spokespersons--some editors of these two newspapers--are only a small handful, whereas Falun Gong practitioners are many. It is certainly not the original intention of the First Amendment to allow the freedom of a few to tell lies at the expense of a great number of people's freedom of belief.
5. The report of military secrets by the Washington Post was a one-time incident, whereas the slanderous reports by China Press and Sing Tao Daily are frequent, continuous and possess the intent to attack.

From the above comparisons, it is not hard to see the huge discrepancy between the two cases. On the surface, China Press and Sing Tao Daily take advantage of the principle of freedom of the press in their slanderous propaganda against Falun Gong. In reality what they are doing is opposing and attacking freedom of belief, and are fundamentally violating the First Amendment to the Constitution. Their illegal practice must be stopped.

We hope that people with a sense of justice will publish righteous articles in various major English media to truly safeguard the freedom of belief bestowed upon the American people by the Constitution.