Newsweek Lied, People Died

[visionary]

What I find odd is that someone would even write an article about what happened...unless they expected it to have serious repercussions. I mean why report something as seemingly insignificant as flushing prisoner's religious texts down the toilet (whether it happened or not) unless you expect to cause an uproar in the Middle East. and stir up more animosity?

I can't see what good it would do to report this at all, unless one expected people in the Middle East to be paying close attention and had planned on using them to fuel interest in the story. Especially without a lot of evidence or corraboration.

[Sarge]

Originally posted by visionary

What I find odd is that someone would even write an article about what happened...unless they expected it to have serious repercussions. I mean why report something as seemingly insignificant as flushing prisoner's religious texts down the toilet (whether it happened or not) unless you expect to cause an uproar in the Middle East. and stir up more animosity?

I can't see what good it would do to report this at all, unless one expected people in the Middle East to be paying close attention and had planned on using them to fuel interest in the story. Especially without a lot of evidence or corraboration.

Ding ding ding. Give the man a stogie!

[MrSilverMaC]

Originally posted by visionary

What I find odd is that someone would even write an article about what happened...unless they expected it to have serious repercussions. I mean why report something as seemingly insignificant as flushing prisoner's religious texts down the toilet (whether it happened or not) unless you expect to cause an uproar in the Middle East. and stir up more animosity?

I can't see what good it would do to report this at all, unless one expected people in the Middle East to be paying close attention and had planned on using them to fuel interest in the story. Especially without a lot of evidence or corraboration.

I agree, and I pretty much felt the same way about Abu Ghraib, though that was a far more serious incident.

[Golgo-13]

Originally posted by SoCalSkins

Why convert them from one moronic religion to another?

Ding ding ding...winner of stupid comment of the day award!!! :notworthy

[JimboDaMan]

Originally posted by visionary

What I find odd is that someone would even write an article about what happened...unless they expected it to have serious repercussions. I mean why report something as seemingly insignificant as flushing prisoner's religious texts down the toilet (whether it happened or not) unless you expect to cause an uproar in the Middle East. and stir up more animosity?

I can't see what good it would do to report this at all, unless one expected people in the Middle East to be paying close attention and had planned on using them to fuel interest in the story. Especially without a lot of evidence or corraboration.

How can something be seemingly insigificant and also be expected to cause an uproar?

There's nothing all that odd about it. Its not far off from many things we've admitted have happened - and even now we're not sure it didn't happen. Would anybody be shocked if tomorrow the military announced they found such a case?

I do agree that at first glance it doesn't seem to be a big deal in the overall scheme of things. And now we know that apparently those riots had little or nothing to do with Newsweek and Gmo toilets.

[sonsofwashington]

I was just fired up when Newsweek initially decided to not retract the article and brushed it off as if the riots had not caused any turmoil at all.

17 dead. Does it matter how they died (I mean if a soldier/police officer shot them or they were merely trampled on by their fellow rioting crowd)? Not to me. They are already dead. Although they may have many more reasons to riot the article was in fact fuel for the fire. Newsweeks seems to think it wasn't. It's a slap in the face to the people who died.

Think I'm wrong? So where would those people be if the article was not published? Probably still alive. That's my point.

[Joe Sick]

So, who do you guys trust: A man who gets paid to spin the truth (Scott McClellan) or The chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff?

It sounds like conservatives are just trying to invent another librul boogeyman. Another news source they can check off their list as being biased, especially when they publish an article not favorable to this administration.

It also seems that most people don't have a problem with actually descreating a Koran, just the fact that someone wrote about it.

Lastly, these guys were probably terrorists anyway, right? Why should we care if they live or die?

http://usinfo.state.gov/is/Archive/2005/May/13-299433.html

Afghan Riots Not Tied to Report on Quran Handling, General Says

Army investigating allegations of mishandling at Guantanamo Bay facility

By Jacquelyn S. Porth

Washington File Staff Writer

Washington – The chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff says a report from Afghanistan suggests that rioting in Jalalabad on May 11 was not necessarily connected to press reports that the Quran might have been desecrated in the presence of Muslim prisoners held in U.S. custody at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Air Force General Richard Myers told reporters at the Pentagon May 12 that he has been told that the Jalalabad, Afghanistan, rioting was related more to the ongoing political reconciliation process in Afghanistan than anything else.

According to initial reports, the situation in Jalalabad began on May 10 with peaceful student protests reacting to a report in Newsweek magazine that U.S. military interrogators questioning Muslim detainees at the Guantanamo detention center “had placed Quran s on toilets, and in at least one case flushed a holy book.” By the following day the protests in the city had turned violent with reports of several individuals killed, dozens wounded, and widespread looting of government diplomatic and nongovernmental assets.

However, Myers said an after-action report provided by U.S. Army Lieutenant General Karl Eikenberry, commander of the Combined Forces in Afghanistan, indicated that the political violence was not, in fact, connected to the magazine report.

Meanwhile, Myers said the U.S. military has assigned Army General Bantz Craddock to investigate allegations about the handling of the Quran at Guantanamo. Craddock brings the full weight of his responsibility as commander of the U.S. Southern Command to this effort.

Myers said the International Committee of the Red Cross has approved the edition of the Quran that has been distributed to Muslim detainees in Guantanamo. Craddock has been investigating the claim that proper respect was not given to the Koran. There are now some 550 enemy combatants at the military installation, which is designed to isolate individuals whom the military has identified as likely to have valuable intelligence about international terrorism.

Craddock and his team have examined the prisoner interrogation logs and Myers said “they cannot confirm yet” that there ever was a case of a U.S. interrogator flushing a Quran down the toilet. He did say there is another unconfirmed log reference to a guard report that a detainee tore pages from the Quran and flushed them in an attempt to flood the holding area as a form of protest.

Myers answered questions about the alleged Quran incident on the same day that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice addressed the issue during an appearance before the House International Relations Committee.

She said disrespect for the Quran will never be tolerated by the United States and such disrespect “is abhorrent to us all.” Pakistan has voiced its concerns about the alleged incident, and Rice said the United States understands and shares the concerns of its Muslim friends. She went on to voice this request: “I am asking that all our friends around the world reject incitement to violence by those who would mischaracterize our intentions.” (See related article.)

INSURGENCY SEEKS TO DISCREDIT NEW IRAQI CABINET, MYERS SAYS

At the Pentagon, Myers was also questioned closely about the increase in violence in Iraq in recent weeks. He acknowledged that there has been “a spike in violence in early May,” but he said this is to be expected given the “very violent insurgency” that is under way in that country.

The insurgency’s use of a variety of roadside and car bombs has been difficult to thwart, the general said. He also noted the difficulty of sealing Iraq’s borders against infiltrators. On this “we need cooperation from Iraq’s neighbors” -- an issue that is being pursued vigorously, Myers said.

Most insurgencies have a lifespan of three to nine years, Myers said, and addressing them militarily requires patience. In this case, the insurgents are out to discredit the newly formed Iraqi Cabinet, he said.

Myers made his remarks during an appearance with Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and other senior military and civilian officials to talk about the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure recommendations, which will be formally unveiled May 13.

[Joe Sick]

Also, where is the outrage about the 500+ plus who were killed by their government in Uzbekistan?

This is one of our allies in the war on terror, remember? They are one of the places that we outsource torture to.

[visionary]

Uzbekistan is a mess, we can't be everywhere at once. And I wonder how Russia would react if we tried to "interfere'" in still another of their ex-satellites.

It would be nice if we didn't have need of their (Uzbekistan's) assistance at times, and hopefully in the future we will do something more significant to help the people there...but for the moment, but for the moment there is not too much that can be realistically done, without causing severe diplomatic damage to both our relations with them and likely with Russia...both key allies in the War On Terror.

[Prosperity]

Originally posted by Golgo-13

Ding ding ding...winner of stupid comment of the day award!!! :notworthy

It was a perfectly valid point.

[Guest Gichin13]

Newsweek really screwed this one up badly. Big mistake, horrible reprecussions. Poorly thought out journalistic decision. They should be roundly hammered as they are right now.

[chomerics]

Originally posted by Gichin13

Newsweek really screwed this one up badly. Big mistake, horrible reprecussions. Poorly thought out journalistic decision. They should be roundly hammered as they are right now.

Are you serious??? Which is worse, a MAGAZINE printing two paragraphs about an incident, or the president using completely FALSE information to justify war???

According to you, the magazine is far far far far worse :doh:

I still can't believe there is this much of an uproar about printing two paragraphs in a magazine, then have it retracted, yet there is no problems with the fact that we PURPOSELY FALSIFIED intel reports to justify going to war!!!!

[chomerics]

Originally posted by dreamingwolf

larry your agruing propaganda.

What propaganda was he arguing? The FACT that the yellowcake story was a LIE, or the fact that you can't seem to rationalize reality from spin?

Thats fine. If for you undermining the other party is fine so be it. Its the world we live in. Just understand that your method of politics is encouraging anti-american media sources. They will be pro when your guy gets in, but for me I cant stomach that you guys actually eat up anti-american propaganda.

NOWHERE did I see propaganda in Larry's post, he posted FACTS. The only bit of propaganda was spewed from your keyboard. You have the audactiy to complain that HE'S un-American, WTF!!! Do you honestly think this way? Do you have a clue as to what reality is, or do you go around all day, or all life for that matter with rose colored blinders on??? Why don't you go to the freeper land, at least then you can boost your ego by thinking you're right.

Those reports come daily from al-jazera with no effect on the world, but our guys spill some lies for them and it comes with a gold pound for ever letter. I know you hate republicans but you have hate those how undermine the country. I maybe a republican and you maybe a democrat, but one thing that is for certain is that we are both americans.

Larry doesn't hate republicans, Larry hates MORONS, but the republican party is breeding a bunch of MORONS right now, there is a distinct and definate difference.

And stop with the you're on our side BS, you are not on our side, you are a 2-bit partisain hack. You come in here and have the unmittigated gaul to say Larry is un-American, yet he should be more like you??? WTF???

For you to put your party above america really makes me question you, and you should really evaluate yourself. If your willing to undermine our countries efforts for political gain are you not an american you are a democrat stooge.

No sir, you are the stooge. You are the one who is putting your party before the country. You are the one who is so blinded by propaganda, you have absolutely NO idea what the actual truth is, you are a Karl Rove wet dream.

What do you think about the memos uncovered by the Brits, which stated that we were to shape the intel around Iraq? Did you even look at them, or did you do as the neos wanted you to and ignore that FACT? Your party is the one undermining our country right now, you just lack the intelligence to see it.

They admitted they printed the story with no proof of the claim. Thats not good enough for you? You dont see the damage that it did, you accept that the chaos that was bred from it was acceptable cause it was a dig on the administration?

The chaos was NOT because of the article, but you, because you believe everything the blowhards tell you, think this is the case. Grow up and start reading information from all sources, and stop getting your information from the right wing media conglomerate, it will make you a better man and a more informed individual. . . but then you would actually expose yourself to the truth, what to do, what to do :doh:

Come on man be reasonable. Im all about free press, but Im not about press being so free as to subvert the opposition at will. The press has a responibility to be accurate and have fact behind them. Not lunge at every opp to descredit their opponent. Just to let you know the only radio I listen to is jfk so I guess from time to time orielly is on, but really Im just tracking don and mike(liberal douches). I dont think Ive ever heard a limbaugh broadcast.

BS all over your posts. You are such a complete fraud, and it shows in your posts. Libral douches? Un-American, and you actually have the balls to claim Larry is being Un-American for posting FACTS :confused:

Im not trying to argue whether the iraq war was prestine, Im just saying that we shouldnt be a propaganda machine for the enemy. Unfortunately you, and the others on the left, feel that its appropriate to be the enemies propaganda machine. Im not saying that our press should kiss the administrations ass, but that they should not try to sweep our legs out without facts. I guess on that we will have to agree to disagree.

Give the rhetoric a rest, this entire post was the largest piece of BS I have seen on ES in quite a while. You have got to be the biggest hypocrite walking on the face of this planet if you truly think this. Then you further dig your own hole by trying to relate debate to "siding with the enemy"??? You are a really sad excuse for an American, and you should really take some time out of your life to look at yourself in a mirror. That should be your starting point if you even want to be taken seriously on this board. Otherwise, I will be all over your crap like a swarming group of flies exposing you for the fraud you truly are.

[Sarge]

Originally posted by chomerics

Are you serious??? Which is worse, a MAGAZINE printing two paragraphs about an incident, or the president using completely FALSE information to justify war???

According to you, the magazine is far far far far worse :doh:

I still can't believe there is this much of an uproar about printing two paragraphs in a magazine, then have it retracted, yet there is no problems with the fact that we PURPOSELY FALSIFIED intel reports to justify going to war!!!!

The bottom line is that this was nothing more than another attempt to dig at the administration.

AL Newsweek didn't count on the results and probably didn't even bother to think about them.

Maybe it's time for the libs at these rags to grow the phuck up and join the rest of us in the real world

[chomerics]

Originally posted by Sarge

The bottom line is that this was nothing more than another attempt to dig at the administration.

AL Newsweek didn't count on the results and probably didn't even bother to think about them.

Maybe it's time for the libs at these rags to grow the phuck up and join the rest of us in the real world

No Sarge, they were not "trying to dig" at the administration, they were doing their job. They made a mistake by using a source of information they used before.

And no, it is time you people who are claiming to be the "ownership society" actually own up to a mistake.

You have been duped again, as the memo about Bush invading Iraq is now off the news. But you would say the "libral media" and it is such a crock of crap. Tell me how a two paragraph piece is a newspaper is MORE important then a memo stating that the president went into Iraq KNOWING they were not a threat and LIED to America???? WTF????

[SnyderShrugged]

I'm glad this thread hasnt turned into a partisan debate.

[Thiebear]

Originally posted by chomerics

No Sarge, they were not "trying to dig" at the administration, they were doing their job. They made a mistake by using a source of information they used before.

And no, it is time you people who are claiming to be the "ownership society" actually own up to a mistake.

You have been duped again, as the memo about Bush invading Iraq is now off the news. But you would say the "libral media" and it is such a crock of crap. Tell me how a two paragraph piece is a newspaper is MORE important then a memo stating that the president went into Iraq KNOWING they were not a threat and LIED to America???? WTF????

What? I missed that one? And how do you [insert different story here] to justify this incident? Each should be able to stand or fall on its own. Apples to newly constructed decks right?

1. The Newspaper did it's job if it got it RIGHT!

2. If not: Then theres a problem.

3. At no point is it torture *man has that definition gone way down* or grounds for retaliation. Museums in NY show the virgin mary covered in feces and a cross in a glass of urine for the world to see all the time.. (insert fake gasp).

4. IF the paper saw it as insignificant they weren't thinking ahead or at all i guess. If they did, they are complicit in attempting to cause the stir before getting the story nailed down.

[chomerics]

Originally posted by Thiebear

What? I missed that one? And how do you [insert different story here] to justify this incident? Each should be able to stand or fall on its own. Apples to newly constructed decks right?

Bear, I am not using it as a justification, but using it to show the brutal loyalty to a party, and complete lack of logic being discussed on this thread.

People are more concerned with a two paragraph article, which was recanted BYW, athen they are when our president sends our soldiers to war on even worse intel. It shows the true nature of your charactor if you actually want to cry foul and blame Newsweek for the violence. A general came out and said the artcle was not responsible for the uprising, but our actions were.

Now people are trying to say this is the problem with the media and the war, but they NEGLECT to look at the administration with the same skeptical eye.

This is the definition of a hypoctite, and a partisain hack. Putting your party before your ideology. It's why we get into trouble as a country, because it stops AMericans for thinking for themselves, they only have to listen to Rush to get their ideas. It's truly sad and it brings an extremely moronic part of our country out into the open.

1. The Newspaper did it's job if it got it RIGHT!

2. If not: Then theres a problem.

THey did their job, on both ends. The recanted when they thought it might not be provable.

The administration on the other hand has made NOTHING as far as an admission of guilt on ANYTHING. You fail, and you get upward mobility with Bush, because he's more concerned with yes people then actually doing a job. It has split our country in two, but people just lack the intelligence to see it.

3. At no point is it torture *man has that definition gone way down* or grounds for retaliation. Museums in NY show the virgin mary covered in feces and a cross in a glass of urine for the world to see all the time.. (insert fake gasp).

4. IF the paper saw it as insignificant they weren't thinking ahead or at all i guess. If they did, they are complicit in attempting to cause the stir before getting the story nailed down.

Give me a freaking break, where were you using this eye on the president when he did THE EXACT SAME THING with the yellowcake Niger story??? THen when the story come out that it IS FALSE, they release the name of an undercover CIA agent!!!! Which is worst, and be careful how you answer this, because you are bordering on the line of being a hypocrite and a political stooge.

[Thiebear]

Did you write the article Chomerics, cause your stretching quite a bit in your post above also.... you should retract 1/2 of it and then apologize.

Again, you ignore the current issue and say NO don't look here look at my other hand: Look over here at a Yellowcake Niger story that we haven't talked about for a year... this way we can sidetrack even more..

Again, you ignore the facts and say:

THey did their job, on both ends. The recanted when they thought it might not be provable.

ummm, if they really did their job, it wouldnt have been recanted due to it might not being able to be provable...

followed up with:

but but but but but neocon neocon, koolaid drinker.. YOU are the problem Bear not anyone else YOU and the Administration based on well other stuff...

nice reply! I think you nailed it.

[dreamingwolf]

you actually expected something else?

[jenmdixon]

Originally posted by skin-n-vegas

I'm glad this thread hasnt turned into a partisan debate.

If one of you guys posted a picture of some random female actress who is politically active wrapped in an American flag, y'all'd find a way to make it a political thread. Just sayin'. :2cents:

[Henry]

Originally posted by jenmdixon

If one of you guys posted a picture of some random female actress who is politically active wrapped in an American flag, y'all'd find a way to make it a political thread. Just sayin'. :2cents:

And it, too, would eventually get closed by me.