Someone needs to tell Snopes to update his website to reflect the latest stance: Outgoing Democratic staff members vandalized the White House. Status: Uh, maybe?
The last update was in June of 2001 and rebuffed the claims of damage.
I do not turn to Snopes for my BS detection but I know that a number of FReepers do use this site as a reference for validation of rumors.
I detect too much bias in the rumors that Snopes chooses to list or not include and more importantly in the way that they are framed (the framing statement is his basis for "TRUE" or "NOT TRUE"). I would think that at least of few of his readers simply read the headline of at least a few of the rumors (face it, who has read every snopes article) and at least some of those readers will go out into the world with the thought, no that was just a NET rumor.
Some recent examples:
A new can design introduced by Dr Pepper includes the text of the Pledge of Allegiance with the words "under God" omitted. Status: Not quite. sorry to say but it is true. His explanation states that the original version of the Pledge did not include the words "under God". Fair enough but to put "one nation... indivisible" indicates that yes, words were removed.
Seventh graders in California are subjected to an intense three-week course in Islam in which they are required to pray to Allah and memorize Koran verses. Status: Not quite. There is no rebuttal to the claim of memorization of Koran verses (just a statement that the school has not addressed the question). Determination of "prayer" can be a vague thing as the students were required to have their own "jihad" (this has to be the non-violent kind, certainly). As the peaceful muslims claim this to be a devotion to Allah, it would have to be catagorized as a prayerful act.
I don't mean to stray too far from the thread but just wanted to raise this for anyone who found value in snopes website.
It should be pointed out that this is far from the first instance of art playing fast and loose with racial history. Countless World War II films depict black and white American soldiers fighting side by side, yet black soldiers were restricted to service support organizations and a few separate combat units during the war...
If they are going to expect to find truth in films based on history, then they are sorely mistaken.
A commemorative statue is more than just a piece of "art", it is a testimonial to the actions of people. To alter the statue is to alter the historical record. The statue serves as propaganda to begin with (not necessarily a bad thing). An altered statue also serves as propaganda. The alteration shifts the meaning of the propaganda.