From pericles@temple.edu Sat May 31 04:49:38 2003 Received: from mxu4.u.washington.edu (mxu4.u.washington.edu [140.142.33.8]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.12.1+UW03.04/8.12.1+UW03.02) with ESMTP id h4VBnc1M020796 for ; Sat, 31 May 2003 04:49:38 -0700 Received: from smtp-out.comcast.net (smtp-out.comcast.net [24.153.64.113]) by mxu4.u.washington.edu (8.12.1+UW03.04/8.12.1+UW03.02) with ESMTP id h4VBna85014215 for ; Sat, 31 May 2003 04:49:36 -0700 Received: from temple.edu (pcp02580450pcs.audubn01.nj.comcast.net [68.44.108.82]) by mtaout03.icomcast.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTP id <0HFR00LGK266TP@mtaout03.icomcast.net> for classics@u.washington.edu; Sat, 31 May 2003 07:49:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 07:47:19 -0400 From: Daniel Tompkins Subject: Re: More on Iraq's cultural heritage In-reply-to: <000901c3274a$4d5539c0$e9e71918@hawaii.rr.com> To: classics@u.washington.edu Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.552) Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable X-Uwash-Spam: Gauge=II, Probability=2%, Report="MANY_USER_AGENTS, QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, __EVITE_CTYPE, __HAS_X_MAILER, __IN_REP_TO, __MANY_USER_AGENTS, __USER_AGENT_APPLEMAIL" Accuracy is indeed an important goal. John Kampfner's May 15 BBC=20 story, available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/correspondent/3028585.stm should have been better edited -- he uses an agentless passive voice=20 once, and says "reports claimed" at another point, failing to=20 distinguish information actually provided by the Pentagon's Victoria=20 Clark, and Centcom's Gen Vincent Brooks from the pro-Army puffery they=20= allowed to circulate. Kampfner did indeed quote doctors who said US=20= forces fired blanks. But all in all, his story is standing up. Lynch=20 was not shot in action, was not mistreated by Iraqis, was fairly easily=20= retrieved. The Iraqi doctors, wrong about the blanks, were right about=20= everything else. American papers often hesitate to republish accounts from other papers,=20= preferring to get their own version. This can result in annoying=20 delays in coverage. But the past week has seen a lot of reportorial=20 activity, none of it doing the Pentagon much credit. The Chicago=20 Tribune, the Associated Press, and so on have confirmed the essentials=20= of Kampfner's account. The AP story, available at: http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2003/05/29/lynch/index.html actually makes clear why the Iraqi doctors concluded blanks were being=20= used: they could not believe US soldiers would use live ammo as=20 indiscriminately as they seemed to be doing: the hospital's deputy=20 director 'said he and his family found themselves surrounded by about=20 20 American soldiers firing their guns. "They were shooting=20 indiscriminately, everywhere, at windows, between our legs, on the=20 floor. We were terrified," al-Hazbar said. He said it then occurred=20 to him that no one was being hit by bullets. "They were shooting at me,=20= but nothing happened to me," he said. Al-Hazbar said he concluded the=20= Americans were firing blanks. "They didn't shoot real bullets because=20 they knew there was no military force in the hospital," he said.' The Army volunteered none of the correct information now being=20 discovered by the press, preferring to hype the "brave souls who put=20 their lives on the line" (General Brooks) and to promote what der=20 Spiegel hyped as "einer gef=E4hrlichen Nacht-und-Nebel-Aktion." =20 Kampfner seems to have been the first to seek a more accurate account.=20= Trish, advocate of accuracy, should give him credit. Dan Tompkins All in all, the journalists did a better job than the Army. On Saturday, May 31, 2003, at 03:57 AM, Trish Winston wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: CLASSICS-owner@u.washington.edu >> [mailto:CLASSICS-owner@u.washington.edu]On Behalf Of Michael Smith >> Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 00:50 >> To: classics@u.washington.edu >> Subject: Re: More on Iraq's cultural heritage >> >> >> On Tuesday 27 May 2003 02:51, Trish Winston wrote: >>> "Fog of war" is pretty much a misnomer. Clauswitz never said it. =20= >>> It's >>> properly "friction" not fog. Unless you're a journalist and >> don't know any >>> better. >> >> Far be it from me [note the subjunctive] to defend the honor of >> journalists. But they do generally try to spell people's names >> right. >> >> --Michael J. Smith >> ms@gf.org >> > Well let's talk about your less than collegial response. During the=20= > war, I > have heard journalists claim they saw AF F-14's (the are navy =20 > planes), the > contrails of B-52's (which have no contrails) and assorted other=20 > gaffes. We > have recently heard lies about Special Forces firing blanks ... as if=20= > Iraqi > doctors could tell and journalist could verify whether there were in=20= > fact, > specialized adapters for blanks. In the grand scheme of things I=20 > think it > would be better if journalists paid more attention to getting their=20 > facts > straight and I can live with them doing so at the expense of=20 > orthographic > skill. > > At least I acknowledged my mistake and I have yet to see errata on any=20= > of > the items mentioned above. > > Trish Winston > Aiea, Hawaii. > > > > Daniel P. Tompkins Director, Intellectual Heritage Program Temple University, 214 Anderson Hall 1114 W Berks St, Philadelphia, PA 19122-6090 pericles@temple.edu; http://courses.temple.edu/ih 215 204-4900 (phone), -2359 (fax) .