And that hoax generated this report by Glenn Reynolds, who never asserted it was true, specifically cautioning that it was big news "if it pans out."
It turns out that it didn't.
Because my additional observations on that post got me an Instalanche, I stand squarely in the chain of evidence and my post may have compounded the error -- notwithstanding the fact that the fabrication was reported by the Daily Telegraph and widely circulated and commented upon by others.
The whole thing makes me feel quite apologetic -- and obligated to add this separate post (in addition to updating my original post), because I try to keep this blog as accurate as I can, which means pointing out errors as soon as I become aware of them.
How dare they (whoever "they" are) make this stuff up? You sure as hell can't blame the bloggers for commenting on it. Not after the story was carried in the Daily Telegraph. This is just part of life. The important thing is to correct the errors and go on.
In any event, the fabricated story inspired me to revisit the old news reports of Abu Nidal's death. I still think the reasons given for his suicide are fishy as hell, and (as I said) disinformation. Years ago I read a biography of Abu Nidal (aka Sabri al Banna) and from what I know about the man, he was too much of a disciplined, master-terrorist to commit suicide. I don't know what he was doing in Iraq, but I doubt it was fun-in-the-sun -- or even studying Mesopotamian archaeology!
But, whether his death was suspicious or not, the evidence linking Abu Nidal to Muhammad Atta now appears to be false.
And that's the end of the hoax as far as I'm concerned.
Unless someone accuses bloggers of deliberately circulating a false story. Funny what people can say over time....
Hope that doesn't happen.
In any case, my sincerest apologies to all!
posted by Eric on 12.18.03 at 09:31 PM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/610
Comments
Hey, I gloated even more than you did! Dan Darling points out that the 2 Newsweek reporters seem to have a thing for debunking certain U.S. intelligence reports, and makes some other interesting points.
We will know more when the coalition forces capture Habbush (former head of iraq intel), or when he surrenders. I still have my fingers crossed on that.
Interesting link. Thank you! It's tough to analyze these things without having access to the facts. I try not to accept anything on faith -- and it certainly makes a lot of sense for a skilled operative like Atta to cover his tracks if he traveled illegally to Iraq on the eve of a major event.
Eric Scheie · December 20, 2003 08:24 AM
That's interesting. Hoax? Thanks to you and Glenn for catching it.
I'm trying to recall if I linked to that any or not, and can't... oh well. As you say, can't blame blogdom for linking it when it's presented as news in a major outlet. Does make an object lesson in not trusting major media outlets without fact checking though.
The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
Don?t bang your head!
Hey, I gloated even more than you did! Dan Darling points out that the 2 Newsweek reporters seem to have a thing for debunking certain U.S. intelligence reports, and makes some other interesting points.
We will know more when the coalition forces capture Habbush (former head of iraq intel), or when he surrenders. I still have my fingers crossed on that.