who wrote this
pauls at utdallas.edu
Sun Nov 25 16:12:36 PST 2007
--On November 25, 2007 5:59:53 PM -0600 "eBoundHost: Artur"
<artur at eboundhost.com> wrote:
> yea that's a great answer. thanks for your insight. this is not some
> technical question that can be researched, this in fact tarnishes the
> image of the freebsd community, so it's not such an easy "go rtfm" type
> of deal.
> problem is that i just came accross it myself and obviously nothing has
> been done about it in the past. so i would like to ask of people, is
> there no better way to get the point accross? do you have to have this
> wording? is it set in stone and can't be changed? I insist strongly
> that we should rework this example, and if anyone insists strongly on
> not doing it, I would like to understand what motive can be possibly
> behind this other than something very deeply evil.
I'll take up the challenge. Hitler was evil. Quoting Hitler is not.
When we seek to suppress information, no matter how troubling, we obscure
the very lessons of history we need most to learn. If, because Hitler was
evil, we do not allow discussion of him, how will future generations learn
of his evil? As we argue this very point, there are people in the world
insisting that the holocaust never happened, that Hitler did not commit
the evil deeds that history has recorded he *did* commit. If we refuse to
speak of him, those who insist he wasn't evil will win the argument by
Surely that is not what you desire?
Paul Schmehl (pauls at utdallas.edu)
Senior Information Security Analyst
The University of Texas at Dallas
More information about the freebsd-questions