Author Topic: How Robert Fisk promoted the Jenin massacre hoax in 2002  (Read 1078 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dan193

  • Master JTFer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1901
How Robert Fisk promoted the Jenin massacre hoax in 2002
« on: August 12, 2019, 05:47:58 PM »
How Robert Fisk promoted the Jenin massacre hoax
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=26988

Of course, corrections and clarifications have never been a feature of Fisk’s reporting on Israel. Most notoriously, he has never properly repudiated the false claims made in his April 2002 articles on the Battle of Jenin in which, despite being in California at the time, he described the “stench of death wafting out from the Palestinian city” and accused “Israel’s undisciplined soldiery” of “running amok,” massacring “hundreds” and concealing the evidence from the world.

Fisk, at first, defended himself by claiming that he never actually described Jenin as a ‘massacre’ and, to be fair to him, this was true. But in writing of “the evidence of mass killings,” the “hundreds of corpses — some of which disappeared, some of which appear to have been secretly buried” and of an Israeli army “that has not yet finished filling the mass graves of Jenin,” he left no room for doubt as to the impression of events that he wanted to leave.

He then attempted to shift to blame for the ‘massacre’ rumour onto Israel, asserting that it was IDF officer, Ron Kitrey, who first spoke of “apparently hundreds” of dead, conveniently ignoring the fact that Kitrey quickly clarified that he was referring to “casualties – those killed or wounded” rather than solely to the number of dead. Today, Fisk defends his second-hand story by arguing that the 52 Palestinian deaths (38 of them terrorist combatants) actually constituted a massacre.

Fisk’s unwillingness to acknowledge his errors is unfortunate given the frequency with which what he calls the “old Fisk prediction machine” gets things so wrong.

Offline Dan193

  • Master JTFer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1901
Re: How Robert Fisk promoted the Jenin massacre hoax in 2002
« Reply #1 on: August 12, 2019, 05:51:46 PM »
Back in October 2006, Fisk was given the front page of the UK’s Independent to spread the libel that Israel had used uranium-based weapons in southern Lebanon.  Here's the article about this.  https://honestreporting.com/indies-uranium-charges/
The charge was swiftly debunked yet Fisk never retracted this libel, which continues to reappear online courtesy of anti-Israel activists.
Article about this. https://honestreporting.com/uranium_shills_/



Offline Dan193

  • Master JTFer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1901
Re: How Robert Fisk promoted the Jenin massacre hoax in 2002
« Reply #2 on: August 12, 2019, 05:53:23 PM »
Most notoriously, Robert Fisk has never properly repudiated the false claims made in his April 2002 articles on the Battle of Jenin in which, despite being in California at the time, he described the “stench of death wafting out from the Palestinian city” and accused “Israel’s undisciplined soldiery” of “running amok,” massacring “hundreds” and concealing the evidence from the world.

Fisk, at first, defended himself by claiming that he never actually described Jenin as a ‘massacre’ and, to be fair to him, this was true. But in writing of “the evidence of mass killings,” the “hundreds of corpses — some of which disappeared, some of which appear to have been secretly buried” and of an Israeli army “that has not yet finished filling the mass graves of Jenin,” he left no room for doubt as to the impression of events that he wanted to leave.

He then attempted to shift to blame for the ‘massacre’ rumour onto Israel, asserting that it was IDF officer, Ron Kitrey, who first spoke of “apparently hundreds” of dead, conveniently ignoring the fact that Kitrey quickly clarified that he was referring to “casualties – those killed or wounded” rather than solely to the number of dead. Today, Fisk defends his second-hand story by arguing that the 52 Palestinian deaths (38 of them terrorist combatants) actually constituted a massacre.

Fisk’s unwillingness to acknowledge his errors is unfortunate given the frequency with which what he calls the “old Fisk prediction machine” gets things so wrong.