The secret government marches on...

[James A. Donald]

    --
On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 08:31:14PM -0700, James A. Donald  
wrote:
> > You have failed to read the article -- he tells us when he 
> > wrote it. Read his article, and fit the timeline of the  
> > events he describes, against the timeline of events the  
> > other article describes.  The time at which he claims to  
> > have visited the airport in his account was an hour or two 
> > before the attack began in the mainstream account.

Declan McCullagh
> You are incorrect. As I said, I read the article. It was  
> reposted from another site and it is anything but clear when 
> it was filed. The New York Times has a timestamp and  
> datestamp;

You do not date it by the datestamp, you date it by the events 
to which Robert Fisk refers.

> Perhaps I'm missing something obvious here

I do not think you have read the article.

Here is Fisk's article http://tinyurl.com/995f

Here is the mainstream article http://tinyurl.com/9966

They contradict each other.  Therefore one or both is lying.  
Since we now have good cause to believe the mainstream article 
true, it follows that Robert Fisk is lying.

> Don't attribute to malice what can be explained by honest  
> mistakes; and journalists rarely have the full story at the  
> best of times.

Probably Fisk did not know where the American forces were, but 
he assured the reader, with great confidence, that he did know.

He claimed to have confirmed Baghdad Bob's account -- the 
account of the Iraqi minister of information, an account that 
events proved to be hilariously false.  In this article Fisk 
claims, claims with enormous confidence and certainty, to 
confirm a speech by Baghdad Bob that caused much hilarity among 
those less credulous.  

    --digsig
         James A. Donald
     6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
     hUerhSZ4SgYnzK+o+9WY+vpqa2fz5wMLUo5P4mdc
     4QTgvRyr+0L2R2DmuDNeXORcSXRqN6x+5NGfxu2AW