Newsweek causes Muslim unrest, then retracts story

I

IZinterrogator

New member
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,156612,00.html

First, they publish a story without corroboration, then they admit after 16 people have been killed that they were relying on a report that came from a detainee's mouth. The original source has now backtracked from his original statement. In my business, that means that they are full of it and the statement made should not be trusted. It seems this holds true here as well.
In the summer of 2002, a Guantanamo prisoner told an FBI agent that an interrogator there flushed the Muslim holy book down the toilet. The FBI did not confirm the allegation, but passed a report containing the detainee's statement to the Department of Defense, Justice Department officials said.
Click to expand...
What kind of substandard journalism is that? This is what passes for investigative reporting these days? You can't have anything disappear in Gitmo without a ton of paperwork documenting the search. Prisoners are closely monitored, as are all personal items they are allowed to have. In my prison, cells were tossed twice a day to find objects that detainees may be fashioning into weapons and to make sure that all items we gave them were there. If a detainee did not want a Koran, it was noted in the log. At my insistence, our SOP (which covered the entire Baghdad AO) did not allow interrogators to refer to Islam in a demeaning manner or use religion against detainees in a negative way, let alone handle a Koran in a negative fashion. Our guards even wore surgical gloves when handling Korans because we did not want to offend the Muslims by having a non-Muslim touch their holy book. So after we take all these precautions to avoid offending their religion, our hard work is flushed down the toilet by Newsweek, just like this alleged Koran. Now more people are ticked off at us, which may cause more deaths among us and the Muslims.

So what do you think should be done about this?
 
Make all the names known. All. From the author, to his boss, to the editor, to the source. From there, I dunno. If it can be proven that they were purposely acting in the enemy's best interest, try them for Treason. If it was gross negligence, Treason would probably be harsh.

Heck, maybe we oughta hand them over to the clerics.
 
That stupidity is going to cost us for many years to come since retractions never reach many of the people who heard the misinformation !! :mad:
 
So what do you think should be done about this?
Click to expand...

If I were a betting man (and I am) I say the Koran in the Krapper probably happened, and the feds told Newsweek to retract it, under pain of (fill in the blank).

The one who leaked the story may have been determined, made sure he wasn't going to confirm it, Newsweek realized they no longer had any evidence, and were, ahem, 'suggested' to fall on their sword

Go ahead, tell me my tin foil hat needs adjusted. I've heard it before, I'll hear it again. All I'm saying is our boy's don't hold the Koran in too much esteem. Heck, I'd do alot worse to that book if I though it would save one life.

If I were going to interrogate a terrorist, what, I'm going to keep him up all hours, give him little sleep so his mind is putty and he'll talk, mess with his mind, but OH MY GOD THE KORAN, I CAN INTERROGATE HIM USING EXTREME MEANS, BUT OH MY GOD, NOT THE KORAN!

Spare me.
 
That stupidity is going to cost us for many years to come since retractions never reach many of the people who heard the misinformation !!
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, a lie gets around the world while the truth is still putting its shoes on. The retraction will never get past the people who instigated the riots because they don't want to look wrong in the eyes of those that followed them.
Make all the names known. All. From the author, to his boss, to the editor, to the source. From there, I dunno. If it can be proven that they were purposely acting in the enemy's best interest, try them for Treason. If it was gross negligence, Treason would probably be harsh.
Click to expand...
Agreed. They were probably acting against the administration rather than for the enemy, but the source should be made known. In Iraq, we always wanted to arrest the source of the intelligence we had as well as the target so we could see which one was really the liar. Never got approval from higher because they said they didn't want people to stop reporting. I thought it would lead to sources reporting only what they knew was true. Most of the time, they just used us to settle their little disputes amongst themselves (which is why torture and desecrating the Koran in front of them is a bad idea). If people knew that the media would police themselves and expose lying sources, then people wouldn't feed reporters a line of BS to advance their interests.
 
Heck, I'd do alot worse to that book if I though it would save one life.
Click to expand...

And therein lies the problem. The report of the book clearly didn't save any lives.

The whole idea is to get these folks to help us kill terrorists, not to use methods against terrorist that antagonize everyone breathing in the region. Doing things that help turn the Average Mohammed against the U.S. project in the middle east only helps terrorists.

IMO, that's just what newsweek did...fueled terrorism, I don't really care what their motive was after that. Increased ratings at breaking a hot story, damaging the administration, whatever...they knew what would happen, and they did it anyway. Shame on Newsweek and I hope that anyone who still subscribes to the rag will cancel.
 
Heck, I'd do alot worse to that book if I though it would save one life.
Click to expand...
Fun fact about interrogating Muslims. If they aren't good Muslims, they won't care and you have nothing. If they are hard-core, they will be so offended that you will never be able to have that interrogator talk to them again. They may not talk to another one because you have fed their prejudicial views of us "infidels". Usually better to show respect for Islam so they will open up more. Once they get started chatting... ;)
 
I think the practice is far outside what a reasonable interrogation would involve (and I don't get too shocked about interrogation methods). If it did happen, it was really, really stupid.

I personally wouldn't be offended if a Muslim was interrogating me and burned a bible in front of me. I can buy another assuming I live.

IZ probably has forgotten more about interrogation than I will ever know, but to me, I would think a more reasonable approach would be to totally isolate them and have the only human contact be with the interrogator.

When I worked in the jail, people would never talk to the Police officers. When offered coffee and genuine humane treatment by a non-LEO, they'd 'fess up to lots of stuff.
 
kjm,

Need a job? :D You seem to already have a lot of the basics down.
When offered coffee and genuine humane treatment by a non-LEO, they'd 'fess up to lots of stuff.
Click to expand...
I used to cheat. I would translate for the doctors during their medical screenings, so they often assumed I was a doctor when I interrogated them. Not my fault they never asked! :D
 
Naw- I don't need a job like that. I learned everything I know about getting any mamalian brain to do what I want by training horses and dogs. The key is to find a mamal who is instinctually a social animal such as a horse or dog or person, and then force them to identify with you as being the surrogate pack leader.

Horses respond incredibly well to that kind of training and so do dogs and kids so I just figured that if a person under a little bit of stress has somebody to vent to, and if you're willing to chat along with them, they'll throw you a bone just to keep that invisible ingredient that 10,000 years of programming has hard-wired them to need.

My favorite accomplishment was getting a man to admit to shooting another (non-fatal, non-serious injury) when the cops had been at it for hours. It took a cup of coffee and a hot meal. It's amazing what tortures a person will endure for a cause and how little they'll sell their souls for for the simple pleasure of a kindred soul.
 
I have an idea what to do.

I read about the problems that erupted in the Middle East when the false story about some one trying to flush the Koran down a toilet.
I felt so incensed by the story, several people killed and seeing the American flag being burnt that I went out and bought a Koran.
I really did.
I am sorry to report that the Koran makes poor toilet paper. I find it a little rough.
And I am not kidding here.
If your a camel jockey and burn the American flag, you are scum.
That simple.
 
You know Ozzieman, being the athiest leaning agnostic I am, I don't put much stock in the esteemed scribblings of the Big Three religions of the world (they've all started in the same place and co-opted each other anyway).
However, I understand they are important to the people that believe in them and wouldn't do anything to defile them (ya never know, I maybe wrong about my athiest leaning agnosticisim). And I certainly wouldn't brag about doing so in a public forum just to stir the pot and inflame emotions.
 
If your a camel jockey and burn the American flag, you are scum.
That simple.
Click to expand...

What if you're an American a burn a flag with a Cedar tree on it?

I am sorry to report that the Koran makes poor toilet paper. I find it a little rough.
And I am not kidding here.
Click to expand...

You went out and bought a book to use it to wipe your butt after taking a dump??? If you want, I can send you my Sears catalog for free, and I'll even rip out the shiny pages. The Arab Muslims got you to go out and buy a book that you used to irritate yourself?? I think they might have gotten the upper hand on you without even trying.
 
If your a camel jockey and burn the American flag, you are scum.
Click to expand...
And if you're a Redneck and similarly defile the Koran, what would your title be?
“It would seem that when backlash faces backlash, we have polarization. When we have polarization there is little room for discussion. Much as we might like to reason together, this serves no purpose when our adversary has already made up his mind, with or without reason. Thus the nation faces a crisis unprecedented since 1861. Since there is little point in argument we must fall back on prayer.”
Jeff Cooper
Click to expand...
 
Unreal............. Newsweek...........

The editor was on the ABC- Good Morning America Show today. This editor explained that the Pentagon was aware of this story that was going to go to print. He said he was sorry it caused trouble but the Pentagon never stopped or advised Newsweek about it's negative effect. Should we trust this spokesman (I mean editor)? Well, I can't find it in my cold + distrusting heart. I'm sorry but the media of this country is filled with more lies and slant than I can forgive. They might get it right 80% of the time ;) but that's a stretch. The few major malfunctions they have printed in the very recent past have thrown gas on a bed of hot embers. Just as our forces make an inch progress, ten miles are thrown back at them. This story has done nothing positive for the forces in Iraq that are trying like hell to get a country on the right path again. These responsible so called journalist better realize the value to have freedom of the press. I would guess in many countries to this day they would at minimal be out a job and in yet other extremes face jail and possible grave danger for the ignorance and lack of time spent before they put this story in ink. It is an act that shows the total ignorance and the greed to sell a story. Seems like a repeat to a Dan Rather issue from recent past? I am glad the White House has voiced how this magazine's story has put lives of American's and other friendly forces in danger. I will NEVER spend one cent on Newsweek again. :barf:
 
Well put, Rich. I admire your stand on the issue.

Folks, I have spent over two years living in the Middle East (Kuwait and Iraq). They are not inherently evil. They have their extremist bad apples just like we have ours (Eric Rudolph and Timothy McVeigh ring a bell?), but these are an exception, just like here in America. It is telling that I would not dare catch a ride from a stranger in America, but have done so numerous times in Kuwait. I do not fear moderate Muslims that wish for openness and acceptance between our cultures, why should you? Seems more likely to backfire on me than on someone who has not been to the Middle East and experienced the culture.
 
IZ,

some people don't have the patience or brain power to conceive of anything more than simple problems and equally simple solutions. They clamor to belong to something, because it gives them a clearly delineated "good" and "evil". Good is whatever group they call their own, and evil is whoever is not in that group. It doesn't matter what they call the enemy....Jew, Muslim, Black, towel-head, pagan, camel jockey, whatever. All that matters to them is that they have an enemy that's easy to understand and clearly labeled.

Wow, buying someone else's Holy Book and using it as toilet paper. What a manly act...takes such courage, too.
 
The editor was on the ABC- Good Morning America Show today. This editor explained that the Pentagon was aware of this story that was going to go to print. He said he was sorry it caused trouble but the Pentagon never stopped or advised Newsweek about it's negative effect.
Click to expand...
Well at least we have it in print that media coordinates and consults with the very government it pretends to monitor.

The other problem is it appears Noozweak is incapable of independent thought as to the consequences for its actions. It seems quite capable of developing its own agitprop but seems unable to predict the consequences of its actions.

For a while I've been saying elements of our media are not worthy of the protection afforded by part of the first amendment. I think Noozweak clearly falls into that category.
 
Knuckleheads are knuckleheads. I know, I have worked for Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Shinto, Hindu, Sikh, inter alia knuckleheads. :D

What to do about Newsweek and the Assault Media. Call to extend the restrictions on the Second Amendment to the First. Licensing, police approval of all broadcasts, waiting periods, age restrictions, etc. inter alia.

We have them, let's drive it in deep. :cool:
 
To the original topic/post

Free Speech is a dangerous thing.

This is what happens when the media, does not exercise responsibility when using its First Amendment right.

This would not happen in other countries for one of two reasons:

1. In some countries they would be in fear of the government. :barf:

2. In some countries their citizenry is intelligent enough to know what they're about to "report" will do nothing but harm their nation's reputation, and put the lives of their soldiers in greater danger.

#1 is not reasonable - no one (I hope) would want to live in a society such as this.

#2 however, should just be a given to any U.S. citizen who consider themselves a patriot.

I feel Newsweak's staff should be tried for murder, and treason... among other things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top