No, Richard Dawkins did NOT say "I will arrest the Pope." Some people will believe anything.

[Towlie]

A lot of the DUers who posted in the http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8127948">"Richard Dawkins: I will arrest the Pope" thread made disparaging remarks about Richard Dawkins that were based solely on their naive acceptance of a http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7094310.ece#comment-have-your-say">Times Online article that has subsequently proven to be false.

http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,5415,Richard-Dawkins-I-will-arrest-Pope-Benedict-XVI,Marc-Horne----TimesOnline,page2#478580

Needless to say, I did NOT say "I will arrest Pope Benedict XVI" or anything so personally grandiloquent. You have to remember that The Sunday Times is a Murdoch newspaper, and that all newspapers follow the odd custom of entrusting headlines to a sub-editor, not the author of the article itself.

What I DID say to Marc Horne when he telephoned me out of the blue, and I repeat it here, is that I am whole-heartedly behind the initiative by Geoffrey Robertson and Mark Stephens to mount a legal challenge to the Pope's proposed visit to Britain. Beyond that, I declined to comment to Marc Horne, other than to refer him to my 'Ratzinger is the Perfect Pope' article here: http://richarddawkins.net/articles/5341

Here is what really happened. Christopher Hitchens first proposed the legal challenge idea to me on March 14th. I responded enthusiastically, and suggested the name of a high profile human rights lawyer whom I know. I had lost her address, however, and set about tracking her down. Meanwhile, Christopher made the brilliant suggestion of Geoffrey Robertson. He approached him, and Mr Robertson's subsequent 'Put the Pope in the Dock' article in The Guardian shows him to be ideal...

http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,5415,Richard-Dawkins-I-will-arrest-Pope-Benedict-XVI,Marc-Horne----TimesOnline,page2#478580">more

See also: http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0410/judge-calls-prosecution-pope-benedict/">UN judge calls for prosecution of Pope Benedict, and http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/04/you_cant_trust_a_murdoch_paper.php#comments">PZ Myers: You can't trust a Murdoch paper

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

1. "Grunt grunt whatever he's still (insert insult here)"

There, I predicted about 20% of the future posts on this thread.

[wtmusic]

5. .

:thumbsup:

[Bluebear]

20. .

:thumbsup:

[SidDithers]

22. Another +1...

:thumbsup:

Sid

[stray cat]

2. I assumed many on DU were applauding the statement - no?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

3. Not bashing =/= applaud

[sarge43]

4. With any Murdoch rag, always turn on the crap detector first, then read. n/t

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

8. Those especially, but that goes for ANY media report. Especially when they are talking about...

...figures the RW and/or the fundies don't like.

[sarge43]

17. How right you are. Crap detector: Don't boot up without it. n/t

[eppur_se_muova]

26. Also known as the Bogometer.

Murdoch publications generally give a high bogon flux reading.

[Ysabel]

6. k and r and thanks for the follow up / nt...

[progressoid]

7. Hey, no fair posting facts and actual quotes.

You're really killing the righteous indignation buzz.

[Towlie]

9. Let's upvote this past the "Richard Dawkins: I will arrest the Pope" thread!

Currently this thread is behind, 17 to 11.

[cal04]

10. thank you for updating this story

I really appreciate it

[Warren Stupidity]

11. Why shouldn't there be a legal challenge?

[Cirque du So-What]

12. Once again, DUers have been led down the primrose path

by a Ruprecht Morlock publication. I look at the numerous duplicate threads predicated on a pack of lies and wonder if there need to be some journalistic standards enforced - perhaps a filter that detects when links to Morlock's rags, the Moonie Times, etc., are posted, which then includes an indelible disclaimer embedded in the post:

CAUTION: THE ABOVE LINK IS TO A PUBLICATION THAT IS RIFE WITH YELLOW JOURNALISM. IT IS A PROVEN SOURCE OF LIES, SO READERS ARE ADVISED THAT ALL PURPORTED 'FACTS' CONTAIN THEREIN ARE DUBIOUS AT BEST - OUTRIGHT FABRICATIONS AT WORST. THE READER IS WELL ADVISED TO SEEK ALTERNATE PUBLICATIONS FOR VERIFICATION OR DEBUNKING AS THE CASE MAY BE.

[Canuckistanian]

13. The WOULD be a good disclaimer

But Skinner would need a extra person on staff just to keep up with all the Murdoch publications and bloggers that publish Murdoch's propaganda.

[Cirque du So-What]

16. That's why it needs to be done automatically

a bit of code that returns the disclaimer whenever a URL for one of the shitlisted publications is detected.

[UTUSN]

14. Too bad, the issue being, somebody NEEDS to say it. n/t

[ZeitgeistObserver]

15. It all adds to the publicity, but it won't change the church.n/t

[Luminous Animal]

18. kick

[Toasterlad]

19. SOMEBODY Should Arrest the Pope.

[madrchsod]

21. +1

[ZeitgeistObserver]

23. I couldn't imagine Dawkins saying something this dumb.

It's not even possible to do.

[Odin2005]

24. Gee, the Dawkins-bashers got suckered by a Murdoch rag?

:rofl:

[ZeitgeistObserver]

25. And apparently they like it that way.

:shrug: