home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!emory!rigel.econ.uga.edu!fatrat.fcs.uga.edu!user
- From: mhulsey@hestia.fcs.uga.edu (Martin Hulsey)
- Subject: Re: 60 min. Cat Shooting
- Message-ID: <mhulsey-250193163659@fatrat.fcs.uga.edu>
- Followup-To: talk.politics.animals
- Sender: news@rigel.econ.uga.edu
- Organization: Dept. Foods & Nutrition, Univ. of GA
- References: <1993Jan25.161122.9344@samba.oit.unc.edu> <C1FFC8.ELp@wpg.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:51:52 GMT
- Lines: 33
-
- In article <C1FFC8.ELp@wpg.com>, russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) wrote:
- >
- >[...]
- > > [lots and lots of Sixty Minutes stuff deleted]
-
- I don't blame you; I imagine that it is very painful to read. When I first
- heard of the segment, I thought of you, boo-hooing in your beer.
-
- It appears that your arguments have been shot (pun intended) to hell. I
- can't wait to see how you weasel out of this predicament.
-
- > I'm going to address your comments in detail, but not without additional
- > investigation. In particular, I want to have a chat with James Gill
- > at the Times-Picayune, who allegedly interviewed some of the LSU
- > employees who had complained about the cat screams.
-
- Allegedly is the key word here. You are not seriously going to persist
- with this argument are you?
-
- > Meanwhile, please call Enid Neidle at the American Dental Association
- > and ask her whether or not the ADA would consider Sixty Minutes to be:
- >
- > a) a purveyor of reliable information; or
- > b) a television tabloid that's unconcerned about the factual
- > basis of its coverage.
-
- When it suits your purpose, newspapers and television are perfectly
- reliable sources of information (the Gerone fiasco that you perpetrated is
- a keen example). Your blatant double standard is again showing.
-
- --
- mhulsey@hestia.fcs.uga.edu (Martin G. Hulsey)
- Neuroscience, NRA-ILA, SSIB, NAASO, IASO
-