Manach wrote: »
His historical account of Ireland during the emergency, "In time of War", is highly recommended
Stovepipe wrote: »
A great man and I have some of his work, but my respect for him palled after I read an interview he did with one of the Beirut warlords, with serious blood on his hands, where he basically kissed ass for a few thousand words. Not one of his finest moments.
cml387 wrote: »
Well I was a bit surprised too, but have a look at this
Mick Tator wrote: »
The first part of that article sets the scene – manipulate a target and throw stuff at it. However, contrary to what is asserted Bob Fisk never claimed to speak fluent Arabic (actually he had more than enough to get by). It then excoriates him for using a translator. He never denied that. Every serious foreign correspondent uses local contacts as guides, translators, drivers, fixers. They arrange meetings, advise on security and their skills help understand the nuances. So the opening attack, to diminish perception of him, is against things he never claimed or hid.
The first thing to do with any report, article or research is investigate. WHO paid for it, WHAT do they want to achieve and WHY do they want it. The source you linked (‘The Critic’) is a relatively new magazine. I’m always suspicious of a publication that is less than open about who is behind it – Critic has a very bare ‘about us’ tab on its site. Where its up-front money/backers came from also is unclear. But…. David Goodhart founder of Prospect magazine supports and describes it as being "a magazine of……… conservatively-inclined thinking". Note that Goodhart is a strong advocate of reducing immigration to the UK. He also chairs ‘Policy Exchange’, a right-wing think-tank described by The Daily Telegraph’ as "the largest, but also the most influential think tank on the right". You do know the Telegraph’s backers, political colours and stance?
So who is/are your link Critic’s editors? No.1 is Christopher Montgomery, who until joining was one of the European Research Group’s (ERG) inner circle. You do know that these people include Jacob Rees-Mogg and other right-wing fundamentalists, imperialists and Brexiteers? Montgomery once was chief of staff at Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party. You do know what Fisk has written about the DUP? Montgomery’s fellow editor, Michael Mosbacher, was one of the founders of the right-wing magazine Standpoint and still is behind CapX, another rabid right-wing jingoistic periodical (whose backers also are unclear).
Do you really expect people like them to admire a journalist like Fisk who called out ignorant decisions by right-wingers– to name just a few - Putin, Bush (and his pawn Blair), Cameron, Johnson, Trump, and French, British, Israeli and American defence industries? His refusal to ‘tone down’ an article on the US was the main reason why he left the Times.
Many people were ‘out to get’ Fisk – Israel because of his stance on what the Zionists are doing to the Palestinians; the US because he was highly critical of their ignorance, ineptitude and tactics such as high-level bombing by B-52’s in Afghanistan. So too were some journalists who were resentful of his output, contacts and scoops. He had several jealous enemies. It is significant that some have waited until his death to come out of the woodwork.
cml387 wrote: »
A lot of good research there. Thank you.
However it doesn't adresss any of the points in the article. Just because some of the people involved have views you don't agree with doesn't make the article wrong.
And I saw the link in a tweet (approving) from Marina Hyde, a Guardian columnist.