1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Way To Go Newsweek

Discussion in 'Issues Around the World' started by Coot, May 15, 2005.

  1. Coot

    Coot Passed Away January 7, 2010

    Newsweek magazine on Sunday said it erred in a May 9 report that said U.S. interrogators desecrated the Koran at Guantanamo Bay, and apologized to the victims of deadly Muslim protests sparked by the article.

    "We regret that we got any part of our story wrong, and extend our sympathies to victims of the violence and to the U.S. soldiers caught in its midst," Editor Mark Whitaker wrote in the magazine's latest issue, due to appear on U.S. newsstands on Monday.

    Whitaker said the magazine inaccurately reported that U.S. military investigators had confirmed that personnel at the detention facility in Cuba had flushed the Koran down the toilet.

    The report sparked angry and violent protests across the Muslim world from
    Afghanistan, where 16 were killed and more than 100 injured, to Pakistan to Indonesia to Gaza. In the past week it was condemned in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh, Malaysia and by the Arab League. On Sunday, Afghan Muslim clerics threatened to call for a holy war against the United States.​

    So, in its rush to get dirt on the US and its military, Newsweek published false and inflammatory information that has resulted in a number of deaths. But it's okay, because, you know, they're sorry.

    Al Reuters account here.

    Original annonymously sourced lies here.
  2. ShinyTop

    ShinyTop I know what is right or wrong!

    When you make inflamatory or serious accusations you should go out of your way to insure accuracy. Similar to CBS story about Bush during the election. I hope Newsweek suffers as much as CBS.
  3. John R. Beanham

    John R. Beanham Typical Aussie Male

    Given the momentum given to this story by the world's media, will they now admit a grossly irresponsible role in these deaths?

  4. deltat2000

    deltat2000 Veteran Member

    Gee, I'm really sorry thier Koran was abused..........(sarcasm off now)

    If this is all it takes to piss off an arab....then they can go :friggin: themselves!

    I seem to remember over 3,000 dead from WTC!. And every MSM source is calling anyone who is pissed about that, some kind of right wing evangelical christian neocon.....

    I am still of the mind today...that if they want a Jihad.....that we give it to them, I am getting really fed up with the "Religon of Peace" bullshit!

    Just my 2cents worth on the subject! :cool:

    And about the Newsweek article...they'll never accept any responsibility for any of the lives lost!

    And why doesn't the Arab world sue Newsweek for compensation.....
  5. Biker

    Biker Administrator Staff Member

    Then you wouldn't mind and not get angry when I insult your religion?
  6. Coot

    Coot Passed Away January 7, 2010

    From the story:

    One of the problems with your rant is that a number of the countries where the problems occured aren't Arab, nor are its citizens.
    All of which is off topic and has nothing to do with the thread.

    Again, most of the countries where the violence occured aren't Arab.
  7. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    Someone should be held criminally responsible. If someone was, these types of stories would not be killing people indirectly or not.
  8. cdw

    cdw Ahhhh...the good life.

    I agree. The uproar that was started in Afghanistan put our people (and others, of course) in danger. Now there is a momentum to the whole thing that is going to be difficult to stop. There are religious leaders calling for the military people involved to be handed over or else. Now, if no one is punished or handed over, there will always be this doubt and an accusation of a cover up. It's not just irresponsible journalism..it's criminal IMO.
    I must say though...since I heard the story I've been trying to figure out how to flush a book down the toilet. :)
  9. IamZed

    IamZed ...

    Why is one story more believable than the other? If a retraction would stop the killing, a retraction will be provided.
  10. Copzilla

    Copzilla dangerous animal Staff Member

    I agree entirely. I think the editors who published this unsubstantiated story that resulted in riots and death should be doing prison time.
  11. Robert Harris

    Robert Harris Passed Away Aug. 19, 2006


    Try one page at a time.
  12. cdw

    cdw Ahhhh...the good life.

    I'm not sure I understand. It's always harder to stop a frenzy than start one. It's harder to get people to change their minds if they think they were right. I hope a retraction will stop the momemtum, but I don't think it's going to be all that easy.
  13. Coot

    Coot Passed Away January 7, 2010

    It may be that we (the MSM) haven't learned anything from Rathergate either. From the original newsweak...errrr...Newsweek piece:

    Investigators probing interrogation abuses at the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay have confirmed some infractions alleged in internal FBI e-mails that surfaced late last year. Among the previously unreported cases, sources tell NEWSWEEK: interrogators, in an attempt to rattle suspects, flushed a Qur'an down a toilet...​

    And now from the Al Reuters story:

    The weekly news magazine said in its May 23 edition that the information had come from a "knowledgeable government source" ​

    Imagine that, going to print with an inflammatory story and having only a single uncorroborated source, yet in the prime piece lede, they claim sources.

    Isikoff, John Barry and the much vaunted four layers of editorial vetting that the MSM is so proud of needs to be the first guys in body armor out there trying to quell this shit in Afghanistan. Furthermore, every mother's son who loses his life or is maimed because of this needs to be able to hold Newsweek and their editorial board both criminally and civilly liable for it.

    The latest scuttlebutt is that Newsweek is going to issue an 'unretraction'. That can only mean that they perceive their actions as so damning that it threatens their corporate existence and would end the careers of their executive management and their editorial staff.

    The military's been accused of targetting reporters, maybe it's time they did.
  14. ShinyTop

    ShinyTop I know what is right or wrong!

    After this it could only be considered self defense.
  15. Techie2000

    Techie2000 The crowd would sing:

    I have two competing trains of thought on this.

    The first is that Newsweek is a for-profit publication designed to generate income for a corporation. They had a source that gave them information, and they stated that they were given the information by an anonymous source, didn't state it was coborated by any official sources, so they were simply publishing what they were told, becaue they knew it could generate them profit and that is their main goal. The publication is protected speech and its not their fault that some people in another country don't have critical thinking skills and their source didn't tell the whole truth.

    The second is that as a member of the respected(?) news media, they have a burden to disseminate facts and the truth, and to make sure that anything so serious is coroborated and verified before going to print knowing there could be serious consequences to printing it and at a minimum printing such lies should be tried under libel laws.

    While I know that the first paragraph is the more accurate description as to the current news situation, I think that's unacceptable. The media has a burden to disseminate the truth, and to make sure everything they report is well documented, and verified. Especially for such serious accusations. If the government doesn't hold the media accountable, then we the people will. The ironic part is, the media is what is supposed to be holding everyone accountable.

    I also think that in spite of this, it is still a bad idea to give our military clearance to shoot reporters.
  16. Coot

    Coot Passed Away January 7, 2010

    Gee Techie, as has been made abundantly clear throughout the decades, we don't kill reporters. Although, in the past, we haven't had reporters, either intentionally or ignorantly, putting soldier's lives at risk.

    The worm has turned. Reporters are now intentionally putting soldier's lives at risk and doing so under the guise of the first amendment. You don't think they should be shot...what do you think should happen to them? A free pass while people die? Withhold information from the general public because exceedingly stupid people will gain access to it and act on it without corroboration?

    What accountability do you want to tag them with, if any? They are responsible for providing false information that ultimately resulted in deaths. What they've done will result in the deaths of American soldiers. What's appropriate here, a timeout? A year off without pay?
  17. Pyrion

    Pyrion Liquid Metal Nanomorph

    Did you forget Whoraldo's "map in the sand" during the opening days of the invasion? He got a slap on the wrist for that.
  18. deltat2000

    deltat2000 Veteran Member

    Sorry for the late reply, been having a terrible time sleeping the past few months, and last nite I finally got a good nites sleep, so I am just sitting here wiping the sleep out of my eyes and waiting for the coffee to brew.

    I sobered up about 18 years ago, and during that process I came to believe that there was a God, that it wasn't me, and that I needed His help to live a sober life. And about 10 years ago decided that I felt most comfortable in the Catholic Church.

    So for the past ten years I've listened to all the bullshit about RC Church, watched the whole church painted as child molesters, the Pope made to look like a Nazi, ...I could go on and build a list of the insulting and crude comments ...buts its not worth the time...

    What does get me angry enough to choke the living shite out of someone is when they try to lump me in with their perceptions of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy crap....when my political beliefs are labeled as some sort of NeoCon movement... I esespecially take offense at some of the vile comments spewed out of Bill Maher's mouth. But do I riot in the streets, do I send him threatening emails, do I attempt to kill his listeners....even though sometimes I wish they'de choke on something...no, I don't take a persons life for that.

    And the morning of Sept. 11th...after watching both the Towers fall, after trying to call my best friend who worked for Carr Futures on the 90th floor of Tower One....did I go down the street to the new Mosque that was built here in my community, and take revenge on the people there....no I didn't!

    And later that afternoon, when I had the go to shop for some groceries, and as I was leaving an angry arab man about my age stepped in front of me, and puffed his chest out like he was someone I should respect or fear....did I rip his throat out? No...I stared him in the eye dropped my bags of groceries....and waited for him to throw the 1st punch.... but the coward stepped back, stood aside and I picked my bags up and walked out of the store.

    A big difference between our religons....mine says to forgive, mine says to love my enemies, mine says to pray for them, theirs says to kill me, theirs says to make me a slave, theis says to lie to me, theirs says to force their way of life on me whether I want it or not!

    So in answer to your reply Biker.....its not okay when you insult my religon, it does piss me off, but I am not going to kill you for it! I'll just attribute it to ignorance and prejudice.
    But then I'm not a follower of the so called religon of peace....I'm a Christian.

    Now about the fabricated stories some of the MSM have put out....they should be held accountable for every life lost...whether its our troops, or Muslim's who have suffered for their lies....they should be brought to task for everyone of them!

  19. MNeedham73

    MNeedham73 Well-Known Member

    IMO, it's only fair that if a reporter's half-assed reporting gets a soldier killed, that the military can respond in kind.

    Afterwards, they can say that they were told by a "knowledgeable source" that the person they shot wasn't really a reporter, but an 'insurgent' [​IMG]
  20. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member


    I've never, ever trusted a lot of so-called "contentious" reports regarding the military that are run by the MSM. My own personal experience with the media is that, when it comes to military affairs, they always mess it up. If you give them the truth, they misinterpret it. If you give them the truth and someone else hands them some lies, the lies get the prime time exposure.

    Obviously, some degree of punishment is required, but probably not legally feasible. I would expect CENTCOM to put a moratorium on embedding any Newsweek reporters with units in Afghanistan or Iraq, however. They can and have blacklisted journalists or outlets in the past, and they can most assuredly do it again. Newsweak will find itself a trifle marginalized, shall we say.

    And all unofficially, of course. ;)


Share This Page