General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRobert Fisk Makes Things Up
So, finally, Private Eye has published the stories that everybody has heard, but nobody has put in print.
Robert Fisk is widely thought to be a fantasist of Johann Hari-esque proportions.
For his book, Pope telephoned Fisks main named source, a British military doctor. He also spoke to a senior British diplomat who had run the relief operation in Turkey in 1991. Both flatly denied there was anything near a clash and thought the charges of theft and tensions were sensationalised. In a later account of the clash, Pope writes, Fisk meticulously describes a flight to the refugee camp in the crew bay of an Apache helicopter. The trouble is, Apaches have no crew bay.
When Popes book came out Ian Black, diplomatic editor of the Guardian, drily noted that he was not the first journalist to wonder with envy and irritation how Fisk managed to get an amazing sounding story from a dull day. Meanwhile the leading Egyptian blogger Issandr El Amrani noted that if you hang around journalists with several decades of Middle East experience, particularly ones who were in Beirut in the 1980s, you keep hearing these stories again and again about Fisk.
Indeed you do. It has been common knowledge for years among British and American reporters that Bob can just make things up or lift others work without attribution and embellish it, writes Jamie Dettmer, another former Middle East correspondent, in his review of Popes book. I recall him doing it to me on a story in Kuwait about the killings of Palestinians at the hands of Kuwaitis following the liberation of the emirate. I remember also the time Fisk filed a datelined Cairo story about a riot there when he was in fact at the time in Cyprus.
http://hurryupharry.org/2012/03/23/robert-fisk-makes-things-up/
tabatha
(18,795 posts)Yes. Yes, I suppose it could have.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)How's that Nir Rosen smear coming?
This shit reeks of, I don't know, desperation? Fanaticism?
I guess Fisk offended the delicate sensibilities of some with his remarks about Colvin and the double standards of the Western press.
tabatha
(18,795 posts)And as for Nir Rosen, I posted an article in his defense - i.e. I posted both sides of the story, as you well know, and have posted nothing since. How many people on this board have done that?
If you do not like what an article states, then take it up with the author or all of the journalists who have known Fisk far longer and better than you. They are stating their opinions based on actual events.
Thus your charge of character assassination is completely false.
And I was completely neutral with respect to Robert Fisk until a couple of weeks ago, when I heard an interview with him on Al Jazeera, where I was shocked when he lied about three different topics.
I think you have anger issues and cannot handle democracy where people write both positive and negative articles on a variety of subjects. That is the essence of democracy.
If there is an article that defends Robert Fisk, I will post that as well.
So keep your insults to yourself. The Robert Fisk article is all over the press, and thus there should be no problem posting it here.
aquart
(69,014 posts)Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)And then hide behind the likes of David Horowitz, Michelle Malkin, Geert Wilders and the rest of the Front Page crew.
There are other, unnamed, web sites that might find such crap more to their tastes.
tabatha
(18,795 posts)MEMBERS of the Vulture Club, a closed Facebook group for foreign correspondents and aid workers, are circling the carcass of Robert Fisk, the Independents man in the Middle East, for his holier-than-thou rant against fellow war reporters following the Syrian Armys murder of Marie Colvin and Remi Ochlik.
Condemning the colonialist assumption that the lives of western reporters are somehow more precious, more deserving, more inherently valuable than those of the foreign civilians who suffer around them, Fisk accused Colvins editors and editors like them of pro-western double standards. The newsrooms of London and Washington didnt have quite the same enthusiasm to get their folk into Gaza as they did to get them into Homs, he concluded.
As a matter of fact, western reporters did get round the Israeli armys restrictions on journalists during its war with Hamas. Led by Bruno Stevens, a brave Belgian photographer, 30 found a way in over the Egyptian border. Fisks innuendo that foreign hacks were glory-hunters for exposing the deaths of Syrians, and hypocrites for ignoring the deaths of Palestinians, has put the war correspondents on the war path.
On the Vulture Clubs web page, Lulu Garcia-Navarro, foreign correspondent for Americas National Public Radio, describes Fisks article as unconscionable. Catherine Philp, US correspondent for the Times, says Fisk makes it up. Dan Murphy of the Christian Science Monitor tells of Fisk writing a piece attacking the Baghdad press corps for being hotel journalists who dared not go onto the streets, while rarely leaving the safety of the hotel pool himself.
http://www.private-eye.co.uk/sections.php?section_link=street_of_shame&issue=1310
Peace Patriot
(24,010 posts)Do you have a link to his remarks about Colvin? And who is Colvin?
----
I just read an Associated Pukes alleged news article in which AP quite simply editorializes, for the entire article, listing all the reasons that the Pope shouldn't visit Cuba. They don't even bother to cite unnamed sources ("Critics of the Pope's planned visit...," or "An official in the State Department...".) There is no attribution at all to AP's opinion that the Pope shouldn't visit Cuba. They just say Cuba's bad this way, that way and the other, and argue against the Pope going there. The unnamed reporter argues! (It's an anonymous AP article.)
The "standards of the Western press" just keep getting worse and worse. Frankly, even with better-written examples of the Western press than AP--such as the New York Slimes or the Economyst--I don't believe anything they say any more--and I'm almost at the point of applying my rule of thumb for Bushwhacks: whatever they say, the opposite is true; and whatever they accuse others of, they are doing or planning to do--or in the case of so-called news sources, are providing the cover for, or are planning to provide the cover for.
I've just about had it with "the Western press." It is nothing more than a propaganda machine for the rich, the powerful and the conscienceless.
tabatha
(18,795 posts)The quote is there, and statement by the people who objected.
And do not lump all journalists into one category. As in all situations, there are good, bad and ugly.
Do not judge the good by the ugly.
I think you should read both #3 and #4, and then you may have more information, and more than one side..
And if you do not know who is Colvin, then you do not read much press anyway.
And as for Rosen is concerned, I posed both pro- and anti- articles. I challenge you to find many who do that here.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)"Private Eye is Britain's first, most successful and indeed only fortnightly satirical magazine. Founded in 1961, it has somehow managed to survive for half a century during which it has consistently entertained, informed and irritated its readers.
Over five turbulent decades it has developed its unique mix of jokes and journalism, comedy and campaigning, gags and gossip, laughter and libel, to cover the public life of the nation. From political plots to royal revelations, from City scandal to media manipulation, from legal lunacy to municipal madness. (That's enough alliteration Ed)"
If "Harry" is using this satire as an attempt to discredit Fisk, he might want to rethink his
"source."
BHN
tabatha
(18,795 posts)BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)It is a SATIRE site.
It was NOT a serious article- it was intended as satire.
The site, Private Eye, is the UK version of ONN.
BHN
tabatha
(18,795 posts)You should read the comments here:
http://hurryupharry.org/2012/03/23/robert-fisk-makes-things-up/
Here is a different source:
By: Sean Gannon
FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, June 14, 2007
On October 28th 2006, the London Independent published Mystery of Israels Secret Uranium Bomb, an article by its star Middle East reporter, Robert Fisk, which suggested that the Israeli army had deployed a secret new uranium-based weapon in southern Lebanon during its summer war against Hizballah.
Careful to avoid leveling direct accusations himself, Fisk built his case by quoting uncritically and at length the claims of Dr. Chris Busby, UK Green Party technology spokesman and scientific secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk, that evidence gathered from bomb craters at al-Khiam and At-Tiri indicated that the IDF had used either some novel small experimental nuclear fission device or other experimental weapon (e.g. thermobaric weapon) [or] a bunker-busting conventional uranium penetrator weapon employing enriched uranium.
The result, the article intimated, would be a public health catastrophe in Lebanon on a par with the plague of cancers which Fisk, despite International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA) and World Health Organisation (WHO) findings to the contrary, maintains U.S. use of depleted uranium (DU) is causing in southern Iraq. Israeli denials of uranium-based munitions use in Lebanon were presented as inherently unreliable and begging more questions than they answered.
Curiously, Fisk made no mention of the October 12th report by the Amsterdam-based nuclear research and documentation centre, the Laka Foundation, which found no reason to believe that DU weaponry has been used by Israel during the July/August 2006 war. And in the months since his articles publication he has remained resolutely silent on the series of other investigations which have comprehensively discredited the uranium bomb theory. For instance, one week after Fisks piece appeared, Lebanons National Council for Scientific Research (NCSR) declared that there were no signs of radiation as a result of IDF bombing uranium-based munitions were not used during the recent war.
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=26988
It appears that a lot of journalists have problems with Fisk. I am just waking up to them now.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)If anyone thinks posting this hyper-Zionist tripe is going to make them more credible on this site, they need to rethink. It does help draw a fuller portrait of those who post it, though.
Really? David Horowitz? Michelle Malkin? Geert Wilders? Eurabia? Really?
Here's what else is on their home page:
Common Links:
Columnist Archives
David Horowitz Archives
About David Horowitz
David Horowitz Blog Archives
The War At Home And Abroad
China: Lean, Mean, Modern Fighting Machine
By: Matt Gurney
And Obama yawns. ....more
Why Are Jews Liberals?
By: David Forsmark
Norman Podhoretz asks, and answers, a provocative question. ....more
Netanyahu to UN: Dont Go Back to the Dark Age
By: P. David Hornik
The bitterness behind the Israeli prime ministers diplomatic spin. ....more
Is Glenn Beck Good for Conservatives? Round Two
By: Jamie Glazov
Horowitz v. Frum: Round Two ....more
The Three R's in the Age of Obama: Rappin', Revolution and Radicalism
By: Michelle Malkin
Politicized lessons supplant core academics. ....more
Collaborators in the War Against the Jews: Norman Finkelstein
By: John Perazzo
The next investigative article in a series Frontpage is running about collaborators in the Islamic war against the Jews. ....more
Obamas Dangerous UN Agenda
By: Ben Johnson
Obama insulted his own country, promoted environmentalism, embraced unilateral disarmament, and declared counterterrorism a law enforcement matter. ....more
Geert Wilders' Fight
By: Véronique Chemla
Bat Ye'or is the world's foremost authority on dhimmitude and Eurabia. She is the author of Islam and Dhimmitude Where Civilizations Collide. Her recent study, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, came out in a Hebrew version in 2008, while her next book will soon be published by an Italian publisher. ....more
Colm McGinn
(1 post)Lying liars, and the soft, comfortable, inhabitants of this internet who believe them.
The DU story has to be about DIME munitions (Dense Inert Metal Explosive). Very nasty stuff. Still a military/ trade secret as to the content, but seems to include a dust of heavy metal (either tungsten or DU?) contained in a carbon-fibre casing (a sphere), such that on detonation the metal powder behaves like a whirling saw blade, cutting peoples legs off, and while the initial mechanical injuries (with medical treatment) are survivable, people get sick & die because of whatever the metal is.
Real strong science there, tabatha. (For instance, one week after Fisks piece appeared, Lebanons National Council for Scientific Research (NCSR) declared that there were no signs of radiation as a result of IDF bombing
uranium-based munitions were not used during the recent war. )
And what or who floats Lebanons NCSR?
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)Not everything they write is satire - some is brutally factual. But then everyone here in the UK knows that. I wouldn't agree it irritates its readers. If it did so they simply wouldn't buy it.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)from which the entire text is lifted, btw, that confirms
any reliable sources in the accusations made?
I can't.
Also, do you know if Fisk has responded?
In advance, thanks!
BHN
tabatha
(18,795 posts)dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)I have no knowledge of Pope and neither do I do know if Fisk has responded - he may simply have chosen to ignore it. There may be some elements of truth in there but overall I wouldn't dismiss Fisk as a result.
When you've time go here and check out Private Eye's covers since it first started back in 1961.
http://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers.php
Occasional references you see here to the Telegraph/Torygraph, Guardian / Grauniad , etc all originate from Private Eye. Misspelling of the Guardian's name came about from awful inability to proof read years ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Eye
Some years I posted the title of one of their old cartoons here and got into trouble as a result. All that actually achieved was Free Republic re-printing all of the chatter on the subject.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)Just one look at Pope's "Crisis" board members told me everything I
needed to know about the situation.
I appreciate your taking the time to respond though!
BHN
tabatha
(18,795 posts)tabatha
(18,795 posts)Thursday, March 01, 2012
Again and again: when Robert Fisk pretends he knows Arabic
Tons of reader sent me this and people are mocking him all over the internet. Why does not he retire at long last? Why does he insist on embarrassing himself by wild exaggerations and pretensions. Here, he wanted to show off his (non-existent) Arabic, and he fell flat on his face: "So it's the "cleaning" of Baba Amr now, is it? "Tingheef" in Arabic." Tingheef, Mr. Fisk? Tingheef, Mr. Fisk? Is that Azari or Arabic? (thanks Salam and many other readers)
Posted by As'ad AbuKhalil at 7:20 AM
Labels: English
http://angryarab.blogspot.com/search?q=fisk&max-results=20&by-date=true
tabatha
(18,795 posts)Sunday, February 12, 2012
Fisk
What is this guy saying? Who cares what he is saying? Does he know what he is saying? What kind of reportage is this? What does his/her editor think when she/her receives such dispatches? (thanks Amer)
Posted by As'ad AbuKhalil at 7:21 AM
http://angryarab.blogspot.com/search?q=fisk&max-results=20&by-date=true
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)Go ahead- do a search.
2 results- DU and HurryupHarry.
None of the news sources cited have any links about it.
BHN
tabatha
(18,795 posts)Look and find.
And I did not do a search - I read the comments below the link I gave you above. Try reading the comments - they are very telling.
And you are not paying attention to the substance or what is being said. You are just trying to take attention away from what other journalists are stating. If I had the time, I would summarize the statements and the authors, but you do the reading yourself. If you don't want to learn, then that is up to you. You are quite silly and specious.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)there are none.
Not even from the sources cited in the "article."
BHN
EFerrari
(163,986 posts)tabatha
(18,795 posts)tabatha
(18,795 posts)My particular assertion about Robert Fisks journalism comes in a chapter of Dining with al-Qaeda devoted to the question of accuracy in Middle Eastern reporting (pages 20-27). It relates to an episode during the 1991 Iraqi Kurd refugee crisis on the mountains of the Turkish-Iraqi border. A piece by Fisk said that Turkish troops were on a rampage of looting stealing Iraqi Kurd refugees blankets, sheets and food. This, according to him, had led to a near-armed clash between Turkish and British troops. Fisks report gravely set back Turkish-allied cooperation in the relief effort. Fisk was expelled and I was ordered out too, since I worked for the same newspaper, Britains Independent. I was later reprieved, partly because I had nothing to do with the story. I had been back in Istanbul, writing up my own experiences of the refugee camps.
While putting together Dining with al-Qaeda, I telephoned Fisks main named source in those mountains, a British military doctor. To make sure, I also contacted a senior British diplomat in charge in those days, now in retirement. Both flatly denied there was anything near a clash and thought the charges of theft and tensions were sensationalized. Moreover, I noted inconsistencies between Fisks accounts in the newspaper and in his memoir (The Great War for Civilization, 2005). For instance, in a major narrative section of his book that is absent from the original article, Fisk meticulously describes a flight to the refugee camp in the crew bay of an Apache helicopter. The trouble is, Apaches have no crew bay.
I had shrunk from confronting Fisk in person with my findings. Most journalists hate publicly accusing each other of making things up after all, one might oneself be found to have made a slip in a race to a deadline. A major British journalist told me hed liked Dining with al-Qaeda, but couldnt review it because it meant making a choice between Fisk (seven times named Britains International Reporter of the Year ) and me (last known award: my schools poetry prize). The Guardians Ian Black put it coyly in his review that Pope bravely tackles the reputation of his onetime Independent colleague Robert Fisk he is not the first journalist to wonder with envy and irritation how Fisk managed to get an amazing sounding story from a dull day . As leading Egyptian blogger Issandr El Amrani said in a review: Fisks over-active imagination makes it easy for Pope to find holes in his reporting If you hang around journalists with several decades of Middle East experience, particularly ones who were in Beirut in the 1980s, you keep hearing these stories again and again about Fisk. Its a great, great shame that this otherwise powerful writer keeps on doing that.
http://hughpope.wordpress.com/2011/11/20/i-dont-read-hugh-pope-robert-fisk/
Comment at this article
A day or two later I would read Fisks reports of events I and other colleagues had been to. And more often than not Robert Fisks description of these events were very different from what either myself or my colleagues had witnessed. Eventually i stopped reading Robert Fisk.
In his interview on Turkish TV Bob Fisk stated that he does not read Hugh Pope. Maybe Mr. Fisks reporting might have been somewhat more in line with what unbiased journalism should be had be bothered to read Hugh Pope.
Claude Salhani is the author of three books: Black September to Desert Storm; While the Arab World Slept; the impact of the Bush years on the Middle East, and Islam Without a Veil.
Another comment:
Stephen Glain, journalist and author
This is not a satirical site or a satirical author.
So giggle away with childish glee, and avoid the underlying theme of all of these statements.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)tabatha
(18,795 posts)Pope has stated he found it very hard to criticize fellow journalists - but he did follow up on two of Fisk's sources and they did not pan out. There are other journalists in the link in the OP that report the same thing - Fisk's exaggerations. The links to the Angry Arab were to illustrate even the people who Fisk generally supports do not find him credible.
You are trying all kinds of tactics to dismiss what he said.
I read some articles on Kofi Annan today that were written by neocons, and I was tending toward dismissing them because they were from neocons - but I researched some of the facts, and they were on the money.
Not everything from the right is wrong, and not everything from the left is right, and to assume so is very foolish.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)Sorry, I have a tendency to look behind the curtain
before I buy everything I read on the "internets."
That's just me.
BHN
tabatha
(18,795 posts)Some non bias there.
You do not convince - and the proof will be in the pudding.
PassingFair
(22,434 posts)"Indeed you do. It has been common knowledge for years among British and American reporters that Bob can just make things up or lift others work without attribution and embellish it, writes Jamie Dettmer, another former Middle East correspondent, in his review of Popes book. I recall him doing it to me on a story in Kuwait about the killings of Palestinians at the hands of Kuwaitis following the liberation of the emirate. I remember also the time Fisk filed a datelined Cairo story about a riot there when he was in fact at the time in Cyprus.
http://www.potomacflacks.com/pf/2006/10/flack_profile_j_2.html
Unless this is another Jamie Dettmer, Middle East correspondent!
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)I think you should look at their client list and I also
think you are in over your head on this one.
Respectfully, none the less,
BHN
tabatha
(18,795 posts)BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)Do you know WHO the Hills are?
I am done- I can not have a discussion of any meaning with you
when you have no background knowledge in the matter.
Nothing personal, I just know from experience this
conversation is going in circles and there are other threads
that I find far more worth while.
Carry on, w/out me,
Thanks-
BHN
aquart
(69,014 posts)Took long enough.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Did you think he was a bastard during the Bush years when he used his journalistic skills to tell the truth about Bush's lies? Was he making stuff up then, did he win all those awards for 'making stuff up'?
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)Awards
In 1991, Fisk won a Jacob's Award for his RTÉ Radio coverage of the first Gulf War.[33] He received Amnesty International UK Press Awards in 1998 for his reports from Algeria and again in 2000 for his articles on the NATO air campaign against Yugoslavia in 1999. In 1999, Fisk won the Orwell Prize for journalism.[34]
He has received the British Press Awards' International Journalist of the Year seven times, and twice won its "Reporter of the Year" award.[35] In 2001, he was awarded the David Watt Prize for "outstanding contributions towards the clarification of political issues and the promotion of their greater understanding" for his investigation into the Armenian Genocide by the Turks in 1915.[36] In 2002 he was the fourth recipient of the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism. More recently, Fisk was awarded the 2006 Lannan Cultural Freedom Prize along with $350,000.[37]
He was made an honorary Doctor of Laws by the University of St Andrews on 24 June 2004. The Political and Social Sciences department of Ghent University (Belgium) awarded Fisk an honorary doctorate on 24 March 2006. He was awarded an honorary doctorate by the American University of Beirut in June 2006. Trinity College Dublin awarded him a second, honorary, Doctorate in July 2008.[38]
Fisk gave the 2005 Edward Said Memorial lecture at Adelaide University.[39]
In 2011, Fisk was awarded the International Prize at the Amalfi Coast Media Awards in Italy.[40]
Fisk is also a recipient of the College Historical Society's "Gold Medal for Outstanding Contribution to Public Discourse".[citation needed]
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)Of course it is in their interest to launch a smear campaign against Mr. Fisk.
Trying to discuss the background is pointless though, so don't waste
your time.
Just my friendly advice,
BHN
tabatha
(18,795 posts)What has created this storm, is that Fisk cricitized other journalists --- falsely.
As a matter of fact, western reporters did get round the Israeli armys restrictions on journalists during its war with Hamas. Led by Bruno Stevens, a brave Belgian photographer, 30 found a way in over the Egyptian border. Fisks innuendo that foreign hacks were glory-hunters for exposing the deaths of Syrians, and hypocrites for ignoring the deaths of Palestinians, has put the war correspondents on the war path.
On the Vulture Clubs web page, Lulu Garcia-Navarro, foreign correspondent for Americas National Public Radio, describes Fisks article as unconscionable. Catherine Philp, US correspondent for the Times, says Fisk makes it up. Dan Murphy of the Christian Science Monitor tells of Fisk writing a piece attacking the Baghdad press corps for being hotel journalists who dared not go onto the streets, while rarely leaving the safety of the hotel pool himself.
Read up about the Vulture Club ----
André, Tim, and I were members a close-knit, but informal brotherhood -- I half-jokingly call us the Vulture Club, as we usually convene only when the blood is flowing. Bonds forged in war run deep. Many of us have known each other since the bloodshed in the Balkans in the 1990s, although there are a few older ones around who still think of us as "the kids" (and we tease them right back about their arthritis and fading hearing, the later an inevitable result of being too close too many times to the bomb explosions). My emergency team at Human Rights Watch spends a lot of time in conflict zones with these journalists and photographers, so we feel a special connection.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/04/26/the_vulture_club
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)anyone would make such a transparent effort to smear someone of his reputation, but it does demonstrate why many of our journalists remain silent.
When someone reports the truth rather than the propaganda prepared for them, they WILL be targeted. We've seen it so many times before.
Sorry that Fisk is unwilling to get in line with the latest propaganda, he never was.
I guess you now believe he made up all that stuff you so admired him for in the past??
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)Check out some of my links on the background.
There will always be some who cling to something as truth,
even when provided evidence to the contrary.
Me?
I'm outta here!
See you on the "internets" highway Sabrina!
BHN
tabatha
(18,795 posts)Sorry if you cannot recognize a LIE.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Not going to waste time on this, but I will say he is a consistent propagandist against almost everything and everyone who has challenged the Neocon agenda. Wikileaks, Assange, etc. Just recently he tried to diminish the importance of the release of emails from Stratfor. Reading his diatribe you could almost feel his desperation to do his job of covering for the PTBs.
Fisk is so well-respected that when he writes something it carries weight. His comments about the 'hotel journalists' was dead right, as we all remember from the Bush era. Now, laughably, they are attempting to tell us that we actually got news from Iraq and Fisk was lying. He wasn't the only one, unfortunately for them.
Any journalists allowed into these warzones are generally approved of and/or embedded with the military. And we all know how much they were allowed to see, and if they saw something not beneficial to the war machine (ask Ashley Banfield) it didn't get published.
This looks like a classic smear job. They are in the middle of trying to carry out their PNAC agenda, and Fisk is desperately, as he did re Iraq, trying to expose them. Naturally they are going to try to smear him. Not fooled. And I doubt too many others will be either.
tabatha
(18,795 posts)You have no problem criticizing. Your posts have shown that many times.
I have NEVER uttered a word for or against Robert Fisk, before a couple weeks ago, when I heard him lying on AL Jazeera.
Then I came across the OP article. I would not have posted another thing, except from the ridicule it has received.
There is NO discussion on facts - there is only laughter at a satire society that does report serious articles, and smearing because association with the right.
Nothing about the facts of the case. I am somewhat disgusted.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)has gone on from Iraq, to Afghanistan to Libya and to Bahrain, Syria and I think we have figured out who is behind a lot of those lies. Unfortunately many, many people have been murdered as a result of the interference in these countries, and still are being murdered and the last thing any of them need is to have those responsible for most of the bloodshed coming in to 'save' them. Like Iraq, like Afghanistan and like Libya and the next on the PNAC list, Iran, Lebanon, Syria.
Fisk knows what is going on and now they are doing what they always try to do. But his reputation, not to mention that the majority of the people of the world, know pretty much what is going on, will make their vile attempts to destroy yet another person who gets in their way, impossible.
tabatha
(18,795 posts)I have been spending a lot of time on international blogs on various subjects concerning the ME.
I have been devastated (but understanding) how people in ME have been so put off by everything that the US does because of Iraq and Afghanistan.
They cannot lift the bias and appreciate when positive things are done. E.g. Obama getting out of Iraq.
I have seen some of that here today - everything associated with neocons is dismissed, even if there is truth in the statement.
The independent people who did not confirm Fisk's story about Turkey probably have no association with neocons at all, yet their words are being dismissed as false because of bias.
I have taught myself from South African days to NEVER let bias form my opinion from stereotypes - not all Afrikaners were bad, etc.
I was reading the FACTS of the claims - Fisk's Turkey story was bunkum, because Pope went to the trouble of checking Fisk's sources. Fisk's claims about Israel was wrong, too - 30 journalists went in.
Journalists have been incensed by Fisk's charges - I look forward to more comments from them. But I doubt I will post them here.
The initial response was hilarity at a satire site, despite the fact that the satire site also posts critical pieces.
That tells me all I need to know about serious consideration of statements by journalists. There is none. Every angle to dismiss without consideration of the subject matter is the norm.
PassingFair
(22,434 posts)May we return to our regularly scheduled programming now?
11cents
(1,777 posts)I don't always agree with you, but I admire your ability to disentangle inconvenient facts from ideological packaging. If Fisk has a history of lying which can be confirmed by other reporters, it simply doesn't matter whether the author of this or that anti-Fisk article has neo-con ties. If you have intellectual standards, you deal with facts; if you don't, you use irrelevancies to swat them away.
It's pretty clear at any rate that Fisk's response to the Arab uprisings has cratered what remained of his reputation amongst other foreign correspondents.
11cents
(1,777 posts)Inconvenient facts and arguments are lol'ed away. It's the Fox News viewers' mentality. If it doesn't support my agenda and preconceptions, if it doesn't prop up my tribe, it doesn't exist and needn't be responded to.
I've seen how Fisk's responses to the Arab uprisings, in particular his apologetics for the Assad regime, have made even his former admirers wonder if he's just lost it, or if they'd misjudged him all along. Journalists really don't like calling each other out, but if Fisk attacks the people who've been covering for him he'll go the way of Johann Hari.
The Fisker
(1 post)Robert Fisk is a fantasist and plagarist. Nothing more. The internet is repleate with examples of his plagarism. Here is just one case that is particularly disturbing
Janet Lee Stevens can hardly be accused on being a Zionist. She with Amensty International in Lebanon and witness a to at Sabra and Shatila who was later killed by Hezbollah when they bombed the US Embassy in Beirut. She wrote of her first hand experience of the massace to Franklin Lamb the father of their unborn child.
http://palestinechronicle.com/view_article_details.php?id=15900
This is what she wrote to him:
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2010/997/special.htm#1
<i><b>"I saw dead women in their houses with their skirts up to their waists and their legs spread apart; dozens of young men shot after being lined up against an alley wall; children with their throats slit, a pregnant woman with her stomach chopped open, her eyes still wide open, her blackened face silently screaming in horror; countless babies and toddlers who had been stabbed or ripped apart and who had been thrown into garbage piles."</b></i>
And this is Fisk's plagerisation of the above text, in his 'eyewitness' report
http://www.countercurrents.org/pa-fisk180903.htm
<i>Jenkins and Tveit were so overwhelmed by what we found in Chatila that at first we were unable to register our own shock. Bill Foley of AP had come with us. All he could say as he walked round was "Jesus Christ" over and over again. We might have accepted evidence of a few murders; even dozens of bodies, killed in the heat of combat. <b>But there were women lying in houses with their skirts torn torn up to their waists and their legs wide apart, children with their throats cut, rows of young men shot in the back after being lined up at an execution wall. There were babies - blackened babies babies because they had been slaughtered more than 24-hours earlier and their small bodies were already in a state of decomposition - tossed into rubbish heaps alongside discarded US army ration tins, Israeli army equipment and empty bottles of whiskey.</b></i>
Prometheus Bound
(3,489 posts)And two unnamed people allegedly disagreed with him about a story.
Oh, and a blogger says he's heard rumours about him.
That's some powerful stuff!