Newsweek blames the DoD for their error.

[dorbie 0]

Now Newsweak[yes "ea"] appears to be blaming the Department of Defense for not censoring them .

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash3mi.htm

Isikoff actually said this:

Quote

"Neither NEWSWEEK nor the Pentagon foresaw that a reference to the desecration of the Koran was going to create the kind of response that it did. The Pentagon saw the item before it ran, and then they didn't move us off it for 11 days afterward. They were as caught off guard by the furor as we were."

So they have the sheer gall to imply that it's as much the administration's fault that when they lied about the administration's activities there were bad consequences. This has to be the flimsiest fig leaf in publishing history. They publish a damaging lie about the executive branch, it leads to riots & death and they say the executive branch shares the blame for not foreseeing the consequences of THEIR lie.

The source on this is suspicious too, with Newsweak possibly intentionally saying this was someone in the administration when it wasn't.

And while we're on the subject, how about some mea culpa from those who did the most to provoke this and did the rioting and killing. Newsweak wrote this crap but the folks pointing their bloodied fingers at them are the ones most culpable in the devastation, including the asshole cricketer Imran Khan who just built a political platform on the corpses of his countrymen. When will they apologize for their actions or do they get a free pass yet again for being officially handicapped as the nut jobs in any rational discourse?

[tcnelson 1]

of course they're blaming the DoD...that's the new american way. taking responsibility for your actions is out this season; now, the idea is to point as many fingers in as many different directions as possible and then train yourself to believe your own lie.

"Don't talk to me like that assface...I don't work for you yet." - Fletch
NBFT, Deseoso Rodriguez RB#1329

[kallend 1,635]

At least Newsweek didn't declare a war that killed tens of thousands of people as a result of its "bad intel". Lets get a little perspective here.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[tcnelson 1]

oh yeah, 'cause newsweak thought its employees were under the threat of serious injury or death and that's why they did what they did.

two different scenarios in my opinion but, you live in your world and i live in mine.

"Don't talk to me like that assface...I don't work for you yet." - Fletch
NBFT, Deseoso Rodriguez RB#1329

[dorbie 0]

Quote

At least Newsweek didn't declare a war that killed tens of thousands of people as a result of its "bad intel". Lets get a little perspective here.

So Newsweak and everyone else on the left can do whatever the hell they like because you accuse Bush of lying, yet again?

Instead of dealing with the accusation or any missdeeds just trott out the same hackneyed accusation and move on with impunity.

We had an election after the invasion, get over it and quit excusing treachery with finger pointing.

[chuteless 1]

Newsweek just put one more nail into the coffin of the USA.

Stick around, the funeral is sooner than you think

[EricTheRed 0]

I find it kind of odd that the tempest about this really died off when the Red Cross reports were made public.

What do you have to say now?

Who was lying?

illegible usually

[matthewcline 0]

Nail in the coffin of the USA?

How does that even get near relavent to a story about a koran and a toilet?

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[dorbie 0]

Quote

I find it kind of odd that the tempest about this really died off when the Red Cross reports were made public.

What do you have to say now?

Who was lying?

Newsweak withdrew the story, it's cut & dried. At the time they published they had no evidence just a single incredible source.

Since we're here, I don't have a crystal ball, we all operate on the information available to us, and when Newsweak prints a story they admit is false and then tries to blame the administration for the consequences of that then they have a serious accountability problem. The RC thing is a 2 year old report and after the allegations rules were put in place at gitmo to prevent any "desrespect" towards the Quran.

We've gone from desecration to "disrespecting", here's what Schorno said

Quote

We're basically referring in general terms to disrespect of the Koran, and that's where we leave it

He also specifically said that this was years ago has stopped:

Quote

and has since been able to verify that any disrespect of the Koran has been stopped

Nevermind that the "credible information" behind the accusations are exclusively from a bunch of guys many of whom profess to hate us because we're not devotees of their death cult. Allah only knows what disrespect for their holy book entails. I have no frigging respect for the Quran, that doesn't mean I go flushing it.

And another interesting piece of writing from you know who, showing there are more forces at work behind these allegations than you or the RC would assume.

Quote

first prisons were built for suspected terrorists at Guantanamo in early 2002, prison guards were instructed to respect the detainees' religious rituals. The prisoners were given Qur'ans, which they hung from the walls of their cells in cotton surgical masks provided by the prison. Log entries by the guards indicate that in about a dozen cases, the detainees themselves somehow damaged their Qur'ans. In one case a prisoner allegedly ripped up a Qur'an; in another a prisoner tore the cover off his Qur'an. In three cases, detainees tried to stuff pages from their Qur'ans down their toilets, according to the Defense Department's account of what is in the guards' reports. (NEWSWEEK was not permitted to see the log items.) The log entries do not indicate why the detainees might have done this, said Di Rita, and prison commanders concluded that certain hard-core prisoners would try to agitate the other detainees by alleging disrespect for Muslim articles of faith.

[EricTheRed 0]

Newsweek did not say the story was false. They said the source recanted and stated (after the hub-bub) that he could not be sure.
The ICRC was sure. They had issued a report to the pentagon documenting the events. The ICRC did state that after the information was brought to the Pentagon's attention that guidelines were issued and that this was deemed to be an appropriate response.

To be clear,
Having an anomyous source recant AFTER the shit hits the fan with a "I can't recall" vs documented cases of mishandling by the ICRC is a very weak case.

illegible usually

[dorbie 0]

My quotes are directly from the Red Cross, that's exactly what their own representative said including the timeframe and the fact that they're satisfied it doesn't happen, something that's overlooked in a lot of reports I see today. Moreover there are other explanations as in my additional quote.

What's weak is once the shit hits the fan, blaming the administration for not foreseeing the consequences of something published outside their control. Newsweak actually blamed the administration for not censoring them as if they're obliged to proof read and respond to every article that any organization might publish.

[EricTheRed 0]

Quote

What's weak is once the shit hits the fan, blaming the administration for not foreseeing the consequences of something published outside their control. Newsweak actually blamed the administration for not censoring them ...

I agree that is weak.

IMO thay shouldn't have run the story by the pentagon in the first place.

illegible usually

[dorbie 0]

Quote

I agree that is weak.

IMO thay shouldn't have run the story by the pentagon in the first place.

They asked the Pentagon for comment. They run it past them, and say "we're gonna run this care to comment". They hear nothing back and go with their story then blame the Pentagon. I doubt anything the Pentagon could have said would have stopped them. What they're implying is that the Pentagon's silence was corroboration and amazingly according to Isikoff, that the Pentagon never foresaw the consequences so they're as much to blame (see the original link I posted). The cowardice of Isikoff's the attempt to deflect justifiable criticism of Newsweak towards the administration just makes my head spin

• Quote

[EricTheRed 0]

It seems the source was right after all...

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/05/25/gitmo.quran/

illegible usually

[dorbie 0]

Not necessarily. Did you read the followup article in Newsweek? The guards themselves reported some of these incidents and stated prisoners were doing it to agitate others. Why would they even bother reporting it?

Moreover, if they find touching a Quran offensive, then tough shit. If one falls on the floor accidentally during a search, tough shit. That's what most of these complaints center around. Unadulterated bigotry by the prisoners towards their guards.

Moreover the same article you cite says strict guidelines were in place in 2003 and the Red Cross states at best this bullshit is 2 years old. Sorry dude, but what more can people do, we have strict guidelines, a Quran for each islamofascist terrorist scumbag and a Red Cross happy since 2003.

Show me the problem.

[crozby 0]

More on this in a report by the BBC concerning FBI documents made public by the human rights group American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU):

Quote

After interviewing a detainee, an unnamed FBI agent wrote on 1 August 2002: "Personally, he has nothing against the United States. The guards in the detention facility do not treat him well. Their behaviour is bad.

"About five months ago, the guards beat the detainees. They flushed a Koran in the toilet.

"The guards dance around when the detainees are trying to pray. The guards still do these things."

The ACLU said the documents showed the Pentagon was aware of such allegations being made at Guantanamo Bay long ago, but had repeatedly turned a blind eye to "mounting evidence of widespread abuse".

The Pentagon did not immediately comment on the documents, but officials have said recently that various claims made by former detainees have been proved false.

Officials say they have begun comparing detainee complaints to see if any are corroborated.

ACLU lawyer Jameel Jaffer said: "Unfortunately, one thing we've learned over the last couple of years is that detainee statements about their treatment at Guantanamo and other detention centres sometimes have turned out to be more credible than US government statements."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4581383.stm

[EricTheRed 0]

Quote

Show me the problem.

The problem IMO is the denial and blame placing. When this story ran in Newsweek, the reaction from the Administration and the Pentagon was that the facts were wrong, how dare you lie about this and put our people in danger.

That's a lot different in my view then saying

Yeah, it happened, we fixed it, it won't happen again, sorry.

The tactics that were used remind me of the answers I get when I ask my three year old who ate all the cookies.

illegible usually

[billvon 2,405]

>So they have the sheer gall to imply that it's as much the
>administration's fault that when they lied about the
>administration's activities there were bad consequences.

Looks like what you meant to say was:

So they have the sheer gall to imply that it's the administration's fault that when they revealed the truth about the administration's activities, there were bad consequences.

From the Washington Post:

----------------
Detainees told FBI interrogators as early as April 2002 that mistreatment of the Koran was widespread at the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and many said they were severely beaten by captors there or in Afghanistan, according to FBI documents released yesterday.

The summaries of FBI interviews, obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union as part of an ongoing lawsuit, include a dozen allegations that the Koran was kicked, thrown to the floor or withheld as punishment. One prisoner said in August 2002 that guards had "flushed a Koran in the toilet" and had beaten some detainees.

. . .

Some captives said they witnessed mistreatment of the Koran. Three told FBI interrogators that they had only heard about incidents from other inmates, the records show.

Yet the interviews underscore that U.S. government officials were made aware of allegations of prisoner abuse and Koran mistreatment within months of the opening of Guantanamo Bay in early 2002, and echo allegations made by the International Committee of the Red Cross and a Muslim chaplain, as well as the detainees and their attorneys.
--------------------

From Reuters:

--------------------
The newly released document, dated Aug. 1, 2002, contained a summary of statements made days earlier by a detainee, whose name was redacted, in two interviews with an FBI special agent, whose name also was withheld, at the Guantanamo prison for foreign terrorism suspects.

The American Civil Liberties Union released the memo and other FBI documents it obtained from the government under court order through the Freedom of Information Act.

"Personally, he has nothing against the United States. The guards in the detention facility do not treat him well. Their behavior is bad. About five months ago, the guards beat the detainees. They flushed a Koran in the toilet," the FBI agent wrote.
-----------------

[dorbie 0]

Not what I meant and not at all what actually happened. I didn't expect you to find any fault with the idea that the blame for everything rests with the administration, at least while Bush is the leader. Nor view a single terrorist-prisoner allegation with any skepticism. Blame Bush is what you do best Bill.

"the FBI agent wrote" is actually an FBI agent quoting a detainee allegation lest you be misled by the wording, and there are two sides to every story. Guards in Guantanamo actually reported the Quran flush too saying it had been done by an inmate, and it's all history even according to the Red Cross.

Aside from all this, I'm with Hitchens on this as I said earlier, the real blame lays with the assholes that went on the murderous rampage, what was and still is particularly reprehensible was Newsweeks response that the DoD shared the blame for failing to censor them and their single sourced story. See the link. That doesn't change reguardless of the final outcome of the allegations.

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

Show me the problem.

The problem IMO is the denial and blame placing. When this story ran in Newsweek, the reaction from the Administration and the Pentagon was that the facts were wrong, how dare you lie about this and put our people in danger.

That's a lot different in my view then saying

Yeah, it happened, we fixed it, it won't happen again, sorry.

The tactics that were used remind me of the answers I get when I ask my three year old who ate all the cookies.

Nobody is saying it happened or didn't. At best they're equivocal. Most of the reaction came when Newsweek couldn't back up their story while an inquiry was ongoing. That doesn't change Newsweek's action, of saying the administration shared the blame for their publishing decisions by not censoring them which is still unbelievable.

From people who've accused the USA of orchestrated mass murder in places including Guantanamo saying they were responsible for someone kicking a Quran about the floor is almost a compliment. We still have a single prisoner allegation on the incident in question and remedies that were in place 2 years ago. If you didn't find fault with the administration I would be worried, alas they are not omnipotent when it comes to conducting inquiries.