I was going to rip into this Pioneer Press column by Brian Lambert, mainly because of this paragraph:

One brave and skeptical line of discussion would have been to ask Gibson, "How do you know any of this actually happened?" Journalists are supposed to be in the business of asking impertinent, uncomfortable questions. But I never heard or read anyone in any mainstream press organization wade into that one. Certainly not in the context of interviewing Gibson or in direct reference to "The Passion."

But, as I did my morning reading, I discovered (surprise!) that James Lileks had already ripped into it, and done it better than I would have.

I have on hand a hundred dollar bill I keep for emergencies – why, I don’t know, but it gives a certain amount of comfort. I would hand it over immediately just to hear the exchange that would follow if Mr. Lambert asked Mel Gibson that impertinent, uncomfortable question.

Now let us imagine Mr. Lambert reviewing an “O’Reilly Report” episode where the host began his interview with a major Muslim cleric by saying “So you actually believe in the word of Mohammed? What proof do you have?” One suspects that such an episode would be used to prove the pro-Christ bias of Murdock’s Fox empire, eh?

I await more Lambert pieces in which he goes to Iran, interviews the opposition, and asks them why they believe this Mohammed stuff. "How do you know any of this actually happened?" I can even see the headline: “Are Muslim Beliefs Grounded in Unexamined Fantasy? Devout Unable to Provide Empirical Proof of the Existence of the Transcendental Divine to Satisfy Cathode-Ray Tube Entertainment evaluator.”

From reading Brian Lambert's column and professor Clay Steinman's comments therein, do you think they have some not-so-subtle disdain for religious individuals? How does that affect their teaching/reporting? I'll be curious to see what kind of letters to the editor this dreck generates.