Quote:
Originally Posted by Polar
His response was to post the first sentence of the article. Nothing more.
|
I assumed the veiled threat would be self evident.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polar
Then later, an article basing his entire claim on a single anonymous source. I give two concrete examples as to why anonymous sources should not be considered the best sources.
|
There are no "best sources" on this, because anyone speaking on the record about plans by Israel to attack Iran with nuclear weapons would be guilty of espionage. I don't understand why, in your mind, anonymous is comparable to "unreliable".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polar
I give concrete reasons why the 'anonymous' source should be doubted.
|
I'm glad that in your opinion your opinions are concrete, but not everyone has the same lack of skepticism for your arguments. You name the Downing Street Memos? I'll raise you Deep Throat. He was anonymous until the age of 91, but he managed to blow the lid off one of the largest political scandals of the decade.
Anyway, the journalist is responsible for vetting the claims of an anonymous source, and it's trust in that journalist, not the anonymous source, that earns a claim veracity.
Still, all of this journalism 101 aside, you need to look at this within a wider context. Israel secretly developed nuclear weapons either on their own or with the help of the US in order to defend itself from it's neighbors. Seems innocent enough, right? Well things aren't so clear. Israel has a history of preemptive and asymmetrical warfare.
Go back several months and we see Israel attack Gaza, breaking a 6 month cease-fire (a.k.a the 2008 Lull), on dubious intel that Hamas militants were running gunmen into Israel (this was November 5, 2008, iirc). Hamas of course retaliated with a few missiles. Israel proceeded to bomb Gaza, not just attacking government and military, but civilian buildings. Mosques, hospitals, homes, and schools were targeted. 1,166 to 1,417 Palestinians (officially) died, most of whom were civilian non-combatants. I believe 13 Israelis died.
Go back a year and some change and we see Israel attack Lebanon. Lebanese Hezbollah terrorists kidnapped 3 Israeli soldiers with the intent of trading them for Hezbollah prisoners, a common practice. Israel responded by launching huge bombing campaigns and invading Lebanon, killing over 1000 Lebanese, again targeting civilian infrastructure and again mostly killing civilian non-combatants.
I'm not saying Israel doesn't have a right to defend itself. It does. It doesn't have the right to launch asymmetrical attacks on civilian targets, especially in response to what are relatively small offenses. All they do is aid their enemies by providing them new, angry and heartbroken recruits. And they lose my trust.