Interesting piece on psychedelics, but you lost me in your curt dismissal of Kristof in your addendum on the strength of "dozens of pundits." I take Kristof's full report seriously, as tough as that is to swallow.
What's tragic about the Kristof piece, IMO, is that he reported on a real, horrifying thing that everyone should immediately condemn. And then he included in that report some terribly-sourced garbage that undermines the credibility of the entire piece. There are several debunkings of those elements (the dogs, etc). It's a complete failure of fact-checking. Hopefully the benefit of the piece will outweigh the costs -- hopefully there will be some kind of real, accountable investigation under the next Israeli government (since this one won't do anything). But by mixing fact and fantasy the way it did, the piece may have set the cause of justice backward rather than forward. I liked the Lenchner piece, but it doesn't address the mistakes (nor was that its intention, which is fine, since so many others have done it). As usual this calls for holding two things at once: both the real horrors and the real errors in Kristof's piece.
I'm sure you follow Peter Beinart but some of your subscribers might not. Here's a free "gift" link to his latest, "What We Told Nicholas Kristof." The topic of the dogs comes up a little past the 32 minute mark, and while it by no means offers conclusive evidence, it's well worth listening to.
Interesting piece on psychedelics, but you lost me in your curt dismissal of Kristof in your addendum on the strength of "dozens of pundits." I take Kristof's full report seriously, as tough as that is to swallow.
What's tragic about the Kristof piece, IMO, is that he reported on a real, horrifying thing that everyone should immediately condemn. And then he included in that report some terribly-sourced garbage that undermines the credibility of the entire piece. There are several debunkings of those elements (the dogs, etc). It's a complete failure of fact-checking. Hopefully the benefit of the piece will outweigh the costs -- hopefully there will be some kind of real, accountable investigation under the next Israeli government (since this one won't do anything). But by mixing fact and fantasy the way it did, the piece may have set the cause of justice backward rather than forward. I liked the Lenchner piece, but it doesn't address the mistakes (nor was that its intention, which is fine, since so many others have done it). As usual this calls for holding two things at once: both the real horrors and the real errors in Kristof's piece.
https://peterbeinart.substack.com/p/what-we-told-nicholas-kristof?r=17blu&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email
I'm sure you follow Peter Beinart but some of your subscribers might not. Here's a free "gift" link to his latest, "What We Told Nicholas Kristof." The topic of the dogs comes up a little past the 32 minute mark, and while it by no means offers conclusive evidence, it's well worth listening to.
https://clenchner.substack.com/p/a-brief-history-of-israeli-denialism