Amy Goodman interviews ROBERT FISK
POSTED BY: Howard
UPDATED: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 18:43
VIEWED: 2315
PAGE 2 of 3
Quote:Fisk sound real burnt, he's obviously seen too much. I must assume he doesn't like war, so this obviously colours his observations. He seems delusional. Maybe he does drugs. I also sense him to be a pathological liar.
Originally posted by Geezer:
Like I say, most of this article is Mr Fisk's opinion.
I got it on the sly that he's paid by the left.
BELIEVE NOTHING THAT HE SAYS!!!
Iraq is in fine shape, apart from a persistant flu bug going around.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SevenPercent:
I'm going to call an over/under of three more of his posts before you ask a pointed question that gets a total subject shift; I'll take under. And under 5 before he resorts to calling you either a deluded tool of the American media, or plain ignorant. So think of something good - I'll remember this if you softball ('cause you never do with anyone else).
We have a winner!! SevenPrecent hits a double with predictions of both "deluded tool" and "ignorant".
Now let's get to work on that subject shift.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Howard:
There is plenty of eye witness facts
as well as interpretation.
It is amazing how ignorant and conceted some
people can be when they think that their
account of the situation in Iraq based upon
b.s. US media is more accurate than from a man
who has spent months there and has covered
every war of the past 40 years.
O.K. so don't respond to my specific criticism of the facts in Mr. Fisk's interview. And then decide that only your hand-picked sources of information are valid (I assume that the BBC is just b.s. US media(East) to you.) Keeps the discussion real short. Insults also help reduce bandwidth.
Quote:
Originally posted by Howard:Fisk explains how US reporters do not even venture out of their compounds which he Fisk does.
Quote:
Outside in the streets where some journalists still go, including, for example, my colleague Patrick Cockburn of the Independent and myself and the Guardian Newspaper, not most Americans though one or two.
Well, apparently some US reporters go out, and I occasionally see video of reporters outside the Green Zone. Or maybe they're CGI?
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Fisk sound real burnt, he's obviously seen too much. I must assume he doesn't like war, so this obviously colours his observations. He seems delusional. Maybe he does drugs. I also sense him to be a pathological liar.
I got it on the sly that he's paid by the left.
BELIEVE NOTHING THAT HE SAYS!!!
Iraq is in fine shape, apart from a persistant flu bug going around.
"Good evening sports fans, and welcome to the 2005 edition of the Hyper-bowl. What? Hy-per-bo-le? Never mind then."
Mr. Fisk reports based on his point of view, which can be seen by reviewing some of his articles in the London Independent. http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/article321389.ece He's no fan of the US or UK governments. Compare and contrast with Rush Limbaugh, possibly? With both you have to know where they're coming from so you can provide the correct filters to see what's really being said.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:In my own funny (or not-so-funny) way, I was trying to say that he sees dead people, he sees misery, and I'm not too concerned about his numerical accuracy, the fact that the death and the misery exists is enough for me.
Originally posted by Geezer:
With both you have to know where they're coming from so you can provide the correct filters to see what's really being said.
But of the two, I'd say Rush mixes more fiction than truth into his brew.
Meggadittos Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:???? Geezer, I just naturally assumed that ALL interviews were opinion pieces- don't you? And as far as iraqbodycount- Last time I checked they made quite a point of saying that their figures represent the MINIMUM number of dead- the floor of honest accounting not the ceiling or even the true figure. To keep tossing other figures against theirs as if theirs were the actual number of dead is... um, wishful thinking?
Opinion piece posing as an interview
But to get to the main point of the article, Fisk portray Iraq as being wholly in the hands of Sunni and Shiite insurgents: armed forces hostile to the presence of the "Alliance". Do you have any idea whether this is a true representation of Iraq's status?
Please don't think they give a shit.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
In my own funny (or not-so-funny) way, I was trying to say that he sees dead people, he sees misery, and I'm not too concerned about his numerical accuracy, the fact that the death and the misery exists is enough for me.
But of the two, I'd say Rush mixes more fiction than truth into his brew.
I don't doubt that Rush is at least as fictional as Fisk. I don't doubt that people are being killed. I just doubt that this is the whole story. Death and misery exist most everywhere. If the US packed up and left Iraq tomorrow would more or less folk die? I think less. Any evidence to the contrary?
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
But to get to the main point of the article, Fisk portray Iraq as being wholly in the hands of Sunni and Shiite insurgents: armed forces hostile to the presence of the "Alliance". Do you have any idea whether this is a true representation of Iraq's status?
I just note that the majority of Iraqis eligible to vote participated in the last two elections. I kind of doubt that the majority of Iraqis are "insurgents". If you consider that the people who are most willing to kill anyone opposed to their philosophy are the arbiters of Iraqi opinion, then maybe you're correct.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Last time I checked they made quite a point of saying that their figures represent the MINIMUM number of dead- the floor of honest accounting not the ceiling or even the true figure. To keep tossing other figures against theirs as if theirs were the actual number of dead is... um, wishful thinking?
Quoting Iraqbodycount.net...
"Casualty figures are derived from a comprehensive survey of online media reports and eyewitness accounts. Where these sources report differing figures, the range (a minimum and a maximum) are given. All results are independently reviewed and error-checked by at least two members of the Iraq Body Count project team in addition to the original compiler before publication."
I am using their maximum figure...currently 30,051. Please do a bit of review before you call me a liar. Thanks.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Geezer: Iraqbodycount says (in the pdf dossier) "Our accounting is not complete; only an in-depth, on-the-ground census could come close to that" They also say:
Please do a bit of review before you call me a liar.
Quote:So, hey, I HAVE read the website. Don't get so tetchy!
What we are attempting to provide is a credible compilation of civilian deaths that have been reported by recognized sources. Our maximum therefore refers to reported deaths - which can only be a sample of true deaths unless one assumes that every civilian death has been reported. It is likely that many if not most civilian casualties will go unreported by the media. That is the sad nature of war.
Please don't think they give a shit.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME