Absence of Concern

[red hander]

'The generals name is in his book. I saw it yesterday on the net somewhere too. I can dig it out for you. I assume the mass graves came from the fact that the israelis, after the battle, attempted to take the dead away and bury them in a mass grave somewhere. A group (a palestinian one i believe) took out a court injunction against them doing this which was upheld in due course and the bodies were returned. I suppose on the day of the massacre there was probably a lot of talk about Israel taking away the bodies without consent. Thats one possible explanation?'

There's irony for you ... didn't the Nazis used to do this type of thing?

[Hardy]

Myles - I did a Google - according to Norman G. Finkelstein, General Ron Kitri said that "hundreds" had died before correcting himself "a few hours later" saying that was the figure for dead AND wounded. That was two days before Fisk's article.

[whiskeysteve]

Whiskeysteve, what are you trying to prove?

That those sources could not not be relied upon to back up your argument.

From the start of this thread I was intrigued by your view of Fisk, from your initial description of him as an odious tosser (I see you have admitted this to be OTT, i agree) and subsequent arguments that he was a journalist with no credibility. When pressed you display that he got the number of dead in a massacre wrong in one instance and that 'he failed in the first responsibility of a journalist, which is to report the truth'.

As you say, journalists were restricted from the area and many reported what they initially heard. Presumably you hold the same critical attitude toward all these journalists. The point is, if you really look hard enough, nearly every conflict journalist fails to report the truth at some time or another. For example, a great many 'credible' journalists were guilty of reporting at great length the existence of WMDs in the run up to the Iraq war.

You are entitled to dislike his views or method of getting them across, I wouldn't argue otherwise. He does tend to argue emotively against Israeli actions, as seen by his 'mass graves' metaphor. On the other hand I can't see how he suffers from a serious lack of credibility or more importantly, integrity as a journalist.

In short, I feel that your critical tirade against him has been bogged down by your determination to unveil some nefarious intention, on his part, in his mistake of exaggerating an already significant number

[Hardy]

In other words, he misreported the events at Jenin, as I said.

[whiskeysteve]

Alright Hardy, looks like you have him bang to rights on mistakenly exaggerating a number that was incidental to his main argument. On a single occasion. His integrity is in shreds 

Your like a dog with a bone on this one

[Hardy]

Your like a dog with a bone on this one

No. I only mentioned it in response to the post containing Fisk's article, in which Fisk himself specifically brought up Jenin. I don't think it was unreasonable of me to point out that Fisk himself had misreported that event. Anything I've posted since then has been in response to those who tried (and failed) to prove I was wrong.

The bone is not mine.

[whiskeysteve]

Your like a dog with a bone on this one

No. I only mentioned it in response to the post containing Fisk's article, in which Fisk himself specifically brought up Jenin. I don't think it was unreasonable of me to point out that Fisk himself had misreported that event. Anything I've posted since then has been in response to those who tried (and failed) to prove I was wrong.

The bone is not mine.

Then let it go 

At least we have moved on from the initial sensationalist statements

[Hardy]

Is this a last word competition? 

[whiskeysteve]

"No you hang up"