So it has come to this again
posted by Infidel753 at 10:04 PM
29 January 2007
About Me
- Name: Infidel753
- Location: Portland, Oregon, United States
Individualist, pro-technology, pro-democracy, anti-religion. I speak only for myself and not for any ideology, movement, or party. It has been my great good fortune to live my whole life free of "spirituality" of any kind. I believe that evidence and reason are the keys to understanding reality; that technology rather than ideology or politics has been the great liberator of humanity; and that in the long run, human intelligence is the most powerful force in the universe.
Previous Posts
- Fermi's paradox
- Flying saucers
- Russian consumer-product design
- What's the point?
- Prague panty statue
- Tragic consequences of superstition
- Debating religion
- More Russian technology
- Space Center
- Islamic imperialism
God doesn't exist
Evolution happened
Global warming is real
Homosexuality is normal
Aging is a curable disease
The election was not stolen
Everything "spiritual" is a lie
Free speech is for everybody
Humans do not have "souls"
Men can't become women
Fetuses are not persons
Words are not violence
Taiwan is a nation
Pluto is a planet
4 Comments:
digby at Hullabaloo has several comments on this controversy:
Spitting Image
No Spit Zone
Civil Freeper Counter-protesters
Anyone who calls him- or herself a skeptic needs to check these sorts of stories out, especially if they come from Michelle "if she says the sky is blue stick your head out the window and make sure" Malkin.
As a red-hot bleeding-heart liberal, let me come out unequivocally against spitting on anyone, real or imagined
Without exception, spitting is stupid, puerile, ineffective and contrary to civilized behavior and common courtesy.
Thanks for the comments.
The story actually originated with the New York Times, not Malkin. The wording of the Times report implies that the incident was witnessed by a reporter or otherwise verified independently, not based on a statement by Sparling -- nowhere in the description is there any such qualifier as "Sparling said" which one would expect to see if it were the latter. I think it's unlikely that the Times would distort its reporting to make anti-war protesters look bad.
As for the Hullabaloo postings, if Sparling has indeed been targeted more than a couple of times, then there may be something to look into, but nothing in the postings strikes me as being evidence that this specific reported incident did not happen. Frankly, I think the postings' condescension and innuendo undermine their credibility.
If the Times report is indeed false, then that will undoubtedly come out, and I'll post the fact here as well.
I encourage other readers to visit BB's website, a wealth of material targeting religious illogic and authoritarianism.
On Vietnam-era spitting, see this.
Post a Comment
<< Home