Does truth matter?
by Scoop Shachtman, 1 October 2007
My last post led to a very strange comment from the owner of a peculiar and obsessive site.
One of the imagined maladies he projects on those he must secretly admire is telepathy. I suspect the reason he does this is because he thinks he has the ability himself. Perhaps he thinks he is a character in Heroes.
Because, apparently, posting a link to a story about the Muhammad al-Durrah picture, and the possibility that all is not as it seems, means I am comparable to Little Green Footballs, or Melanie Phillips (Johann Hari’s standards, but of the right). Both of which are Godwin’s Law-style embarrassments, when it comes to blog debates. A bit like someone shouting “You smell!” in the school playground.
In addition, he also implies that my post is in some way a mechanism to whitewash the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). In fact, my position would be that if a 12 year-old boy was deliberately targeted by IDF troops then they should be held accountable by a court of law. My only concern is whether there is doubt over what happened in the al-Durrah picture.
Or does it not matter? Have we come to the stage that the al-Durrah picture is “true”, regardless of what may actually have happened?
Monday 1 October 2007 at 23:11
Have we come to the stage that the al-Durrah picture is “true”, regardless of what may have actually happened?
Of course not - but we have certainly come to the stage where die-hard partisans have lost all interest in truth.
Speaking of whom, if you don’t like LGF comparisons, you can avoid them by not linking to Pajamas Media, which was founded as a revenue-making propaganda sheet by arch-wingnut and LGF supremo Charles Johnson.
Given that PM bloggers do indeed spend much of their time “whitewashing” the IDF, to the point where readers must wonder whether they’ve ever fired a shot in anger, I would never rely on their reporting.
I think you’re well aware of that website’s record with honest, rational inquiry, since you’ve chosen different source material in this post.
Finally, can the BBC not post a historical story without your assistance? They are professional journalists, after all.
I’m aware they are unpopular around these parts, but the piece itself is pretty clear on the controversy.
Monday 1 October 2007 at 23:19
Malky Muscular,
Mahl-key-mus-kew-lahr
Great defender of the brave and faultless Palestinian people, and their endless struggle against terrorist states, Zionist warmongers, fascist media pawns, and Anglophone imperialists. Prophet of the coming new world order in which the grim triumvirate of Christopher Hitchens, Melanie Philips and Dick Cheney will run an intergalactic Islamophobe federation seeking out and destroying the true left, using their powers of telepathy.
Uses witty and elegant satire to root out the enemies of al-Islam and the real left, whose name has been usurped by a band of fascist imperialist atheist murderers and neo-conservatives in disguise.
See also: Deluded imbecile, Mutual Masturbation, and Talentless Wastril
Monday 1 October 2007 at 23:45
Oooh, needs work - I, for one, don’t think Dick Cheney could even lead a conga-line if one was stapled to his arse, let alone run an intergalactic Islamophobe federation.
As for the Palestinians, they’re far from faultless - I had a crew of them in to clean my bins the other day and they couldn’t tell one end of a squeegee from the other.
Otherwise, top notch. This could be the beginning of an historic shift in Decency - you may, finally, be developing an embryonic sense of humour.
Tuesday 2 October 2007 at 1:05
Malky,
Nice site - funny. Heaping absurdity on absurdity.
Would love to see your writing on Darfur and Rwanda and the Congo and Burma and Tibet and Zimbabwe - all those places where non-intervention has worked just so swimmingly well. Can’t seem to find any though.
“Liberal Isolationalism” means ignoring people dying in far off places again and again and again…(but in a caring way).
Tuesday 2 October 2007 at 1:19
Malky says …the piece itself is pretty clear on the controversy
Utter rot. Note that in the BBC’s ‘timeline’ every single link to reports on Palestinian suicide bombings this decade has been blocked. All of the following unsubstantiated claims are made in the BBC report, with no attempt at correction:
‘His terrifying last moments were captured by French television.’
False. Scenes of the boy dying were not in the France 2 footage released to the media and have never been shown on Television.
‘Jamal can be seen waving desperately at the Israeli soldiers on the other side of the road, as his son screams, obviously terrified, by his side.’
Wrong. It was not clear who Jamal was waving at from the footage; furthermore, Palestinian gunmen were operating in the very same direction as the Israeli post.
‘Eventually both were hit - Muhammad four times. His father survived but was also critically wounded.’
False. Even if we accept that the body in the morgue was the child shown here, the examining pathologist reported only three injuries. No autopsy was performed and no bullets ever recovered.
‘An ambulance driver who came to their aid 45 minutes later was also reported to have been shot and killed.’
This has never been substantiated.
For an incident which contributed to the intifada, and to hundreds of deaths, I would have thought the very first duty of professional journalists would be to ensure that their statements are true.
Tuesday 2 October 2007 at 8:00
You covered yourself in glory on your last visit here, sniggering at skinheads and the NPD in Germany. Terrorising/beating up/murdering immigrants, asylum seekers, gays, Jews, sorry Zionists - it’s all pants-wettingly funny, snort, snort.
PS: As is typical of those who are capable only of holding a single idea in their head at any given time, you confuse what is written in comments with [editorial] content. You are about as funny as Bob Hope - no sense of humour required.
PPS: I know it’s difficult being away from mummy for the first time while you are at Uni, but instead of fetishising Melanie Phillips, you should put down The Heil, get away from that Telewest connection and go out and meet some nice girls. You’ll recognise them by their penetrating supermarket mating call of ‘do we do communal?
Tuesday 2 October 2007 at 8:37
…Or perhaps that embryonic sense of humour will be abruptly aborted, and a return to grim, unsmiling ideological curmudgeonry is more likely.
I did wonder why I merited a whole post, rather than a simple reply in comments - clearly, it’s time for my public dressing down in the DSTPFW teachers’ room.
Well, tits to that. If you don’t like my stuff, here - have your money back, but I’ve no intention of sitting nice while you lot strike vogueish poses to show off your wondrous personal integrity.
If you’re looking for an emotional scratching-post, no doubt the BBC will post something you can wax indignant over presently.
Tuesday 2 October 2007 at 11:49
M&M
100 lines -
“I must check facts before writing shite on the internet”
(Alan Johnson, the Labour MP, is not Alan Johnson EMG speaker at Labour Party conference fringe meeting).
Tuesday 2 October 2007 at 15:31
As ridiculous as MM is, I have to say I’d rather stick my dick into a cheese grater than link to a report by Nidra Poller or Pajamas Media.
Tuesday 2 October 2007 at 16:39
Of course not - but we have certainly come to the stage where die-hard partisans have lost all interest in truth.
Which is what the specialists call “projection”.
Tuesday 2 October 2007 at 18:00
SP - 1000 lines, I must develop a sense of proportion, following which I may be able to form a rudimentary sense of humour.
To whit…
Alan Johnson, the Labour MP, is not Alan Johnson EMG speaker at Labour Party conference fringe meeting.
Nor is he an ex-Rangers and Scotland player, or a BBC journalist recently kidnapped in Gaza.
When reading, always consider the possibility that the writer may be misleading you for comical effect.
Tuesday 2 October 2007 at 21:06
Ever since this controversy began, AFP have refused to release the unedited footage captured on the day of this incident. That’s why folk raise suspicions about it. Is it not reasonable to fear that an agency which is hiding something, does indeed have something to hide? Especially when they are paying trial lawyers to keep the stuff hidden. It’s only 30 minutes of video tape for heavens sake.
There are accusations that the whole thing was a staged performance, set up by a Palestinian stringer. And based on troop dispositions, sightlines, ballistic impact marks, there may be some mileage in that. AFP have known, for some considerable time, that there is one surefire way of dispelling that suspicion, and they alone have the evidence with which to defend their professional integrity.
Analogy: There is always one, indisputable way for a good girl to prove she’s still got her knickers on, isn’t there?
Wednesday 3 October 2007 at 2:53
If ever there was a case which demonstrated the tragic consequences of poor journalism, here we find it.
The old blood libel is already well promoted on islamic television
Tragically the misreporting in this case gave the libel new fire.
Wednesday 3 October 2007 at 10:42
The constant need of the indecents to stress their hilarious sense of humour suggests some sense of inferiority in that area, I would suggest. Shouldn’t a genuine funnyman make you laugh rather merely insisting all the time that you should be laughing?
Wednesday 3 October 2007 at 15:00
That’s a bit harsh, Dave. I haven’t admitted this before, but the reason I gave up blogging was that I realised my po-faced “decency” had prevented me from being even one-tenth as funny as Malky Muscular, but I’m working on it:
A Burmese monk walks into bar…At least that’s how the militia man said the monk got that fatal head injury—and who are we to impose our Enlightenment view of truth on an agent of a sovereign state?
Take my mother-in-law…no please take her…Take her outside and beat her for not having my dinner ready on time. You Westerners just don’t understand our African culture.
So the optician asks the Bosnian Muslim if he can read the fifth line down on the chart and the Bosnian Muslim says: ‘Read it? That guy put me in an concentration camp back in ‘92—’I mean: that footage was all faked by the Zionist media.’
No, please, don’t go. I’ve got 600 000 more where these came from.
Wednesday 3 October 2007 at 22:42
dllr — I have to say I’d rather stick my dick into a cheese grater than link to a report by Nidra Poller or Pajamas Media
Fair comment, although Orwell’s aphorism still holds — albeit by its fingernails.
Malky is right — a half educated moron doesn’t warrant the time Scoop wasted writing the post, although he should be congratulated on finding out about my secret life as the Madge Ritchie of the Old Town. Must be off now to do my 100 lines — I will not criticise racism on the BBC, I will not criticise racism on the BBC …
Thursday 4 October 2007 at 0:00
I will not criticise racism on the BBC…
How about you write out these lines…
I will not shit the bed like a deranged paraplegic when faced with contrary opinions.
I will not wage culture war against public service broadcasters like some kind of wingnut loon when their reporting contradicts my worldview.
I will not spit the dummy when faced with people who disagree with me.
Honestly, you Decents. You all come off like free speech fanatics, but you shit your pants like drunk toddlers when faced with opposition.
Sooner or later, you’re going to have to realise that your policy goals are opposed by a wider constituency than a small coterie of far left fuckwits.
Thursday 4 October 2007 at 1:39
Oh dear, Muscular. Whatever happened to your much flaunted sense of humour?
Thursday 4 October 2007 at 6:23
Malky is a very funny, silly little boy, with his singular remarks here about disabled people, his belief that there’s nothing wrong with a little racism on the BBC — and what are a few dead Turks or Somali asylum seekers, eh, eh? Nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say no more.
Who are these ‘decents’ to whom he keeps referring? What ‘policy goals’ is he talking about?
Thursday 4 October 2007 at 7:32
A third question: where is the evidence for this purported ‘culture war’ against the BBC? Scanning the last 5 weeks here, there are half a dozen posts which refer directly to the BBC. Most quote the BBC as a source of record, one is supportive, and one is mildly critical of the BBC. Jog on.