【新唐人2014年06月04日訊】大陸《炎黃春秋》雜誌執行主編洪振快和黃鐘，因為跟毛左陣營梅新育等兩名學者就《狼牙山五壯士》的歷史真相，在微博上發生紛爭。他們起訴兩人的案件原定於六月3號和4號開庭，卻突然接獲法院延期的通知，目前，無法得知法庭延遲開庭的原因。
《狼牙山五壯士》是一篇收入在大陸語文教科書的文章，文章描述5名中共士兵跟日本軍隊作戰，最後跳下懸崖的故事。但是近年來這個故事的真實性遭到質疑。
據《南方都市報》去年8月31號報導，廣東廣州市越秀區警方於8月29號晚間將一位在大陸微博上所謂「污蔑狼牙山五壯士」的網民抓獲，並以虛構信息、散佈謠言的罪名予以行政拘留7天。
據媒體報導，這名網友實際上是傳播了2011年12月14號，網路裡，一篇名為《狼牙山五壯士的真相原來是這樣！》的帖子，帖子內容引述當地人的話說，《狼牙山五壯士》裡面的那5人，只不過是幾個共產黨的散兵游勇，來村裡後要吃要喝，而且稍不如意就打人。由於幾個人手上有槍，村民們也不敢對他們怎麼樣。後來有人想出了個辦法，偷偷的把他們的行蹤告訴了日本人，於是日本人就來圍剿他們。
去年9月，大陸《炎黃春秋》雜誌執行主編洪振快在《財經網》上質疑說，警方如何判定歷史上的事是否是謠言？為此，他進行考證，發現「狼牙山五壯士」故事從一開始就存在諸多細節分歧。
洪振快指出，語文課本當中關於「五壯士」的作戰目地、撤退方向、跳崖地點等歷史信息，都與事實有出入。他說，「五壯士」最後階段的作戰目地主要是掩護連隊主力撤退，而談不上掩護群眾轉移。五名戰士登上狼牙山，是被逼無奈，而不是把敵人引上絕路。
洪振快隨後跟另一名編輯在《炎黃春秋》2013年第11期共同撰文指出，不同資料對「狼牙山五壯士」的很多細節描述都是不一致的，包括有沒有拔老百姓的蘿蔔吃。
目前供職於商務部擔任研究員的梅新育，則在大陸微博反駁說：《炎黃春秋》的這些編輯和作者是些甚麼心腸啊？打仗的時候都不能拔個蘿蔔吃？梅新育隨後罵了一句髒話。
今年4月，洪振快在微博上宣佈，起訴梅新育獲准立案。並解釋起訴梅新育的深層原因是：中國社會存在一類人，遇到不符合其固有觀念的人和事，不問事實，不講道理，就開始罵人。此類行為嚴重惡化了社會風氣，降低了全社會的道德水準。為使討論問題回歸理性，也促使這些人樹立基本的法治觀念，必須進行這場公益訴訟。
5月26號，雙方再次火花四射。梅新育的微博寫道，當天收到豐臺法院通知6月3號開庭。他表示準備迎戰。洪振快回應說，希望梅、郭兩人好好準備，請個好律師，來場高水平的法庭辯論。
洪振快6月2號告訴《新唐人》，法院已經通知推遲審理案件。
大陸《炎黃春秋》執行主編洪振快：「你去看他們兩個的微博你會知道，起訴現在延遲了。（記者:延遲到甚麼時候？）現在不清楚。（記者:為甚麼延遲呢？）我們不清楚。」
洪振快並表示，已經做好訴訟的準備。
而中國社科院下屬的「國家文化安全與意識形態建設研究中心」，也在「微博」咄咄逼人的寫道，這個訴訟案事關所謂「抗日史實真相曲直及當今社會道德價值取向的重大問題」，並罵道﹕「辱蔑抗日英雄，天理不容！司法部門更要講黨性！」
洪振快去年9月在《財經網》撰文指出，「抗日戰爭中的英雄應該受到敬仰，但本著對歷史負責的態度，當時的實際情況如何，公眾有了解真相的權利。如果說當時為了激勵軍民抗日意志，誇大宣傳可以理解的話，但時過境遷，歷史條件完全改變之後，人們更想知道歷史真相。」
洪振快是歷史學者，出版的著作有《講武論劍》、《紅樓夢古畫錄》、《亞財政》等，其中2008年出版的《亞財政》引起廣泛關注。
採訪編輯/秦雪 後製/李勇
Court Delays Hearing on Langyashan Truth Debate
An online dispute about the historical facts of “five heroes” at
Langyashan during the Sino-Japanese war has been going on
between Yanhuang Chunqiu magazine and the Maoist left
scholars.
The court hearing on June 3 and 4 was suddenly postponed
without an explanation.
Langyashan’s Five Heroes is a story taught at elementary
school.
It describes five Chinese Communist soldiers fighting with
the Japanese army, and finally jumping off a cliff.
The authenticity of this story, however, received much criticism.
Last year, Southern Metropolis Daily had reported that
Guangzhou police arrested a Chinese on August 29.
He was said to have spread online rumors to slander
Langyashan’s Five Heroes and subjected to a7-day administrative
detention.
Chinese media revealed, a Dec. 14, 2011 online post, “The fact
about Langyashan’s five heroes is actually this!” detailed what
locals described: The five heroes were in fact stragglers of the
Communist Party, who went to the village and demanded food
and drink.
They hit when displeased.
The villagers were frightened for they held guns.
Someone decided to report their whereabouts to the Japanese
who came to the village to crush them.
Last September, Yanhuang Chunqiu magazine executive editor
Hong Zhenkuai commented, how can the police discern if it’s
historical fact or rumor?
His research then led to finding many differences in the
details of the Langyashan’s Five Heroes.
Hong Zhenkuai pointed out that many details were different
from the facts, including the purpose of the battle, the direction
of retreat, and the location of jumping.
He stated, the final battle was conducted to cover the retreat,
rather than transfer of the mass of civilians.
The five soldiers were forced to get onto Langya Mountain,
rather than lead the enemy to a dead end.
The 11th edition of 2013, Yanhuang Chunqiu magazine
published an article by both Hong Zhenkuai and Huang Zhong
detailing the different descriptions about the five heroes in
Langyashan, including whether or not the soldiers had dug the
radishes.
A researcher at the Ministry of Commerce, Mei Xinyu, retorted
on Weibo: What kind of hearts do the Yanhuang Chunqiu
magazine editor and writer have?
Can’t the soldiers dig a radish during the war?
Mei Xinyu also swore in his post.
This April, Hong Zhenkuai announced on Weibo that the
lawsuit against Mei Xinyu was permitted.
He explained the reason for the lawsuit: There are a group of
people in China now who ignore the facts and rationality and
would just curse against people and things opposed to the
accepted concepts.
These behaviors have seriously damaged social values and
moral standards.
This public interest litigation must be conducted to restore
rational discussion and establish fundamental legal concepts.
On May 26, the two sides clashed again.
Mei Xinyu stated on Weibo that he had received the court
notice that the hearing is scheduled for June 3.
He is ready for the battle.
Hong Zhenkuai responded, he expected the opponents to hire
good lawyers for a high standard of court debate.
Hong Zhenkuai told the NTD on June 2 that the court has
postponed the hearing.
Hong Zhenkuai: Their Weibo post has also stated that the
hearing is postponed.
NTD reporter: Until when?
Hong Zhenkuai: Not sure.
NTD reporter: Why is it postponed?
Hong Zhenkuai: We don’t know.
Hong Zhenkuai indicates that he is ready for the debate.
The Academy of Marxism under the Chinese Academy of
Social Sciences also argued on Weibo that the lawsuit is about
the historical facts of anti-Japanese and the moral values of
society.
It also stated, “God forbids those who dishonor the war heroes!
The judiciary should acknowledge the Party spirit!”
Hong Zhenkuai published an article in Caijing last September:
The war heroes ought to be respected.
However, to be responsible to history, the public has the
right to learn the facts.
The temporary hype to inspire during the war is understandable.
However, time has passed and as history continues,
people want to know the truth.
Hong Zhenkuai is a historian.
He is the author of “Historical facts of martial arts novels”,
“Paintings of Dream of the Red Chamber”, “Political Wealth”,
and so forth.
In particular, the 2008 “Political Wealth” has received
widespread acclaim.
Interview & Edit/QinXue Post-Production/LiYong
