Thursday, March 8, 2007
Honest Reporting is looking for a retraction from one of the most irresponsible writers and one of the most irresponsible journals. Good luck with that.
In October 2006, notoriously anti-Israel journalist Robert Fisk was given the front page of the Independent to spread the libel that Israel had used uranium-based weapons in southern Lebanon during last summer's war.
This was challenged at the time by HonestReporting UK, following a UN investigation clearing Israel of the allegations only a short time later. HR UK castigated the Independent for its shoddy journalism and its failure to issue a retraction. (Read the full communique here.)
Still, Independent readers are under the false impression that Israel employed "secret uranium bombs". This, despite a second acquittal by the Lebanese themselves in the past fortnight, as described by Lebanon's Daily Star:
A panel of experts from the United Nations, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and other international agencies announced a unanimous determination Monday that no depleted-uranium weapons had been used in the summer 2006 war in Lebanon. "To date, there is no evidence of depleted-uranium-ammunitions use during the 2006 conflict in Lebanon," Didier Louvat, IAEA head of radioactive waste issues, told a news conference hosted by the National Council for Scientific Research in Bir Hassan...
Of course the whole thing was absurd from the start -- the idea that DU munitions would constitute a "secret uranium bomb" even if they had been used -- but hey, reason has never stopped the thousand irrational conspiracy theories of the Middle East, for which Fisk serves as a direct conduit.
not morally bound by truth
Hey - it's not fair to criticize this guy. He has gone on record saying that , with regard ot the Middle East, facts and evidence are "no longer relevant" instead, journalists are "morally bound ... to show eloquent compassion to the victims."
To the extent that victims really are victims--and let's face it, the Palestinians are genuinely victims too--then giving the facts and evidence should be a perfectly effective way of showing them compassion. By using lies, Fisk is tacitly admitting that the truth isn't damning enough.
As his reputation gets more and more tarnished, Fisk's shoddy reporting will do his cause more harm than good.
If the Independent won't retract, maybe someone should take out a full-page ad in a newspaper or magazine that's read by roughly the same audience (The Times, Guardian?) giving the whole story, or maybe a television ad. That way, at least the news will be out there.