| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 11/23 |
| 2005/5/16 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:37703 Activity:high |
5/16 Newsweek lied and people died.
\_ Lied?
\_ Yes, lied. They claimed that the military confirmed something
that they didn't confirm. Now they aren't even retracting their
story.
\_ They claimed that the military confirmed something that they
will no longer confirm...
\_ So where were you when the New York Times was hyping the war
in Iraq with hundreds of lies about Saddam's huge arsenal of
WMD?
\_ You do understand that a mistake by one news organization
does not justfiy another mistake by a different
organization.
\_ I'm not defending Newsweek. I think they fucked up and
they should own up to it. However, I think all the
right wing blustering and rage about it is pretty silly
given that we got into a useless war on track to cost
more than Vietnam in constant dollars based on a huge
tissue of lies that was printed in the NYT amongst
many others. Don't hear much blustering and rage about
THAT. It seems like lies are perfectly all right as
long as they justify your desired ends.
\_ Well, I don't think NYT lied, nor did Newsweek. They
made mistakes, but so does everyone. The best they
can do is to own up to their mistakes and correct
their processes so that future mistakes are less
likely. Also, I find it somewhat sad (if it is
true) that there is only "right wing blustering and
rage". We should all be upset about the Newsweek
error, just as we should all be upset about errors
in NYT and elsewhere.
\_ Okay, what was Newsweek's mistake? They got this
tidbit from a "knowledgable source", one they had
used before. They asked two DD officials for
confirmation. The first declined to comment. The
second said another part of the article was wrong,
but didn't question the part about flushing the
Koran. So newsweek ran it. This sort of thing
used to be called journalism. Two weeks later,
their source backs out and the pentagon gets
pissed. Something's fishy. --scotsman
\_ Good journalism requires at least two sources
for a story.
\_ Sounds to me like they thought they had two:
Their source, and the official who read the
story and didn't object. It wasn't a
positive assertion that "yes, this is in an
upcoming report from an investigation", but
it certainly seems they checked it out.
It just really smells too much of shoot-the-
messenger for me.
\_ I'm not sure "no comment" and "That
sounds like something I heard once"
count as confirmations.
\_ What about "I've reviewed your piece
and you can't print this [other
unrelated part]"?
\_ That would be confusing 'not
denying' with 'positively
affirming'.
\_ Which, in an admin that funnels
all FOIA requests through the
white house, seems a line that
needs to be crossed.
\_ This would be the "it's good
enough because doing more is
hard" standard?
\_ Which is why they
apologized, but haven't
retracted.
\_ Newsweek retracted.
\_ Indeed. Sigh.
\_ We should apply this
standard to more things.
\_ And how did people die from Newsweek's lie?
\_ do you even watch any news?
\_ Oops! I read about the Quran flushing and the riot, but I
missed the news that it was a Newsweek lie. -- PP
\_ Watching the news is a big mistake. Reading the news isn't
much better but at least print media sometimes pretends to take
it's job seriously. --!pp
\_ You missed the riots and deaths?
\_ Those were terrorists, not "people"!
\_ The Afghani government claims that the riots there had
nothing to do with the Koran story. Don't know if there
were deaths elsewhere.
\_ (not a troll, really) Afghani == currency. Afghan ==
citizenship.
\_ American Newsweek writers didn't know how inflammatory "flushing
Koran down a toilet" was compared to getting nekkid CIA officers to
sit on detainees laps - otherwise they would have done more vetting.
\_ Newsweek already killed Admiral Boorda.
\_ I posted a long quote from Gen. Myers stating that the US
definitely placed Koran's on the toilet, but can't confirm yet
whether any actually were flushed, but some asshole stomped it.
You and the whole Powerline/LGF crowd are going to look pretty
stupid when it turns out Newsweek was correct.
\_ Where is the quote?
\_ The post may have just been overwritten. Why don't you
repost or post a link?
\_ http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2005/05/mil-050512-dod01.htm
\_ http://csua.org/u/c31
Important stuff is at the very bottom.
Perhaps I am misunderstanding what Myers is saying though.
What do other people take that last paragraph to mean?
\_ For the most part he seems to be denying the Newsweek
report. I have no idea what he was trying to say here
though: "There are several log entries that show that
the Koran may have been moved to -- and the detainees
became irritated about it, but never an incident where
it was thrown in the toilet."
\_ Yeah I take that to mean that the Koran was moved
to the toilet, but not flushed down it, though it
is not entirely clear that he meant that.
\_ "They have looked through the logs, the interrogation logs, and
they cannot confirm yet that there were ever the case of the
toilet incident, except for one case, a log entry, which they
still have to confirm, where a detainee was reported by a guard
to be ripping pages out of a Koran and putting in the toilet to
stop it up as a protest. But not where the U.S. did it.
... That's still unconfirmed; it's a log entry that has to be
confirmed. There are several log entries that show that the
Koran may have been moved to -- and the detainees became
irritated about it, but never an incident where it was thrown in
the toilet." -Gen. Myers
Okay, so there are logs that say the Koran was moved "to" the
toilet, which means to me on the seat (open or closed) or on top
of the water reservoir.
The point of debate is not about stomping on or putting Koran's
"on" the toilet, the latter point the military concedes there are
logs about. The issue is flushing Koran's down the toilet, for
which the military says there are no logs showing this.
\_ So they were "really disrespectful" but not "ludicrously
disrespectful"? The WH puts out a statement saying that
Newsweek is hurting America's image. I say America is
hurting America's image.
\_ You don't get people killed because of Korans moved "to"
the toilet. Flushing Korans is another thing.
Anyways, like I wrote earlier, American Newsweek writers
just didn't understand how inflammatory this was, or they
would have vetted it more.
\_ As noted above, the afghan gov't said that the report
was incidental to the violence. Not a cause. People
are pissed. at us. enough to blow up themselves and
innocents to get to us and those who are linked to us.
And you say it's because newsweek printed an article...
\_ Let's put it this way: If Newsweek's anonymous
Pentagon source didn't back down and Gen. Myers said
"Yeah, we actually do have logs of our guys flushing
down Korans", then the U.S. military would be blamed.
\_ Y'know what. The US Military is already blamed
because we are OCCUPYING THEIR COUNTRY. Because
we are holding people thousands of miles from home
in a legal limbo. The status of the qu'ran in a
gitmo prison is just another speck on our filthy
image.
\_ The one point I can agree with you on is that
Dubya's administration has committed many more
serious mistakes than Newsweek has.
\_ How many other surfaces are there in a military latrine
where one can put a copy of the Koran?
\_ Well, the issue is whether they did it on purpose to
piss off the prisoners.
\_ Is it? I thought the issue was the location of the
of the Koran. The Myers quote made no mention of
the state of mind of the military guard(s). Never
been in a military prison latrine before, but I'm
not coming up with many better locations to put a
copy of the Koran than on top of the can.
\_ Why did they bring one there in the first place?
\_ Ah, that's a different question. I don't
think I've seen any reference to *who* brought
Koran into the toilet. Was it a guard or a
prisoner? But once the book is in the toiilet,
where else better should you put it?
\_ Every prisoner gets a Bible, Koran, or whatever
holy book you want.
\_ Would they give free Playboy subscriptions
if you said you worshipped Hugh Hefner?
\_ What is inferred is that the state of mind of the
prison guards was as you stated: They were
innocently placing the Koran on the john because
it seemed like a good place.
But Myers didn't say that explicitly.
\_ These are supposed to be diaries of interrogations
remember. It makes no sense to respectfully place
the Koran "near" the toilet as an aside in an
interrogation interview. My guess is that they
threatened to flush them as a way to antagonize
the "interviewees." But that is just a guess.
the "interviewee." But that is just a guess.
\_ I don't know, the pentagon guys didn't say
the Koran was "moved to the toilet" during
interrogation, just that it was moved there.
You're assuming this was during
interrogation, but it's also possible
that a gaurd may have picked up a Koran to
get it out of the way and just used the
toilet tank as a convinent place to put it
down. Heck, I read my bible on the can, and
rest it on the tank sometimes. I can see a
gaurd doing this with a Koran inadvertantly.
It's a possibility.
\_ I assumed that it was in a cell that had a toilet in
it, like most jails.
\_ Apparently, some prisoners are kept in en suite
cells, and others are kept barrack-style, presumable
with an attached communal latrine.
\_ I don't understand this logic. Regardless
whether it happened, if the military denies
it, then they mustn't be blamed?
\_ This is hardly the first time this claim has been made:
http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=6058 |
| 11/23 |
|
| www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2005/05/mil-050512-dod01.htm In 1961, President Kennedy took office and found a US defen se establishment that was still largely arranged to re-fight World War I I He ordered an extensive consolidation of bases to meet the challenge s of the Cold War that was then flaring into a somewhat dangerous phase. Subsequent presidents have continued to refine US military infrastru cture as the threats to our country have evolved. And today the Department of Defense again is in need of chang e and adjustment. Current arrangements pretty much designed for the Col d War must give way to the new demands of war against extremists and oth er evolving 21st century challenges. At the direction of the president, and with the support of th e Congress, this department has undertaken several initiatives to addres s our new circumstance, including, as you know, we've been changing the US Global Posture, forging new partnerships to fight extremism, transf orming US military to a more agile Joint Expeditionary Force, and refo rming the way the department does its business. Tomorrow, at the direction of the Congress, the department wi ll present another component of that strategy -- its recommendations to the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission for changes to US military installations. Consider the arr ay of issues of concern to this department: making sure the troops have proper equipment, relieving stress on the force, improving the ability of the forces to cooperate jointly, and protecting forces stationed at v ulnerable bases and locations across this country and around the world. If one thinks about those priorities, it clearly makes sense to do all that one can to identify and remove whatever excess exists, to be able t o better address those pressing needs, and by so doing, the American tax payer benefits. This, in essence, is the logic and the imperative of BR AC. Let me make a few comments about that process that has been u ndertaken over the past two and a half years. First, as required by law, the primary factor in each BRAC re commendation has been an assessment of an installation's underlying mili tary value. Indeed, military judgments have played the key role from th e outset, and properly so. In a time of war, whenever we can find ways to increase support for military needs to help the warfighters, we shoul d do no less. Third, for the first time, these deliberations took place wit h an emphasis on jointness. The military recognizes that operating join tly reduces overhead costs, improves efficiencies; and facilitates coope rative training, research and operations. Importantly, these consolidat ions also free up personnel and resources to reduce stress on the force and improve force protection. The department also considered potential contingency and surge requirements, and possible increases in active-dut y troop levels. The current BRAC effort began more than two years ago with th e development of a 20-year force structure plan and an exhaustive top- t o-bottom inventory of US facilities worldwide. In fact, one might say that the process started even earlier with the Global Posture Review th at we began in 2001, now some four years ago. Indeed, the consideration s related to global posture fed into the BRAC analysis, allowing the dep artment to anticipate and prepare for the return of tens of thousands of personnel and their families, and the knowledge gained by the two-year Global Posture Review has informed the BRAC deliberations in important w ays. Through extensive consultation with the service secretaries, with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the combatant commanders, a panel of high-ranking military and civilian officials developed stringent criteri a and conditions and matrices to assess the military business and suppor t operations of the department, as well as every facility and military b ase in the country, taking into account lessons learned from previous BR AC rounds. The word "base" of course includes much more than one traditi onally thinks of, of a military base. It includes ports, airfields, ind ustrial and research facilities, lease space, and the like. In addition to assessments o f military value, the department also examined other key factors, includ ing the economic impact on existing communities in the vicinity of milit ary installations; the ability of existing and potential receiving communities' infrastruc ture to support forces, missions and personnel; and the environmental im pact, including the impact of costs related to environmental restoration , compliance, and waste management. I'm advised that during these deliberations, senior military and civilian leaders invested thousands of hours, and their staffs expen ded tens of thousands of hours to this important work. They examined an estimated 25 million pieces of data, and they considered some 1,000 dif ferent scenarios. Office and t he Department of Defense's inspection and audit agencies. The department is recommending fewer major base closures than had earlier been anticipated, due in part to the return of tens of thou sands of troops through our Global Posture Review, and also due to decis ions to reduce lease space by moving activities from lease space into ow ned facilities. Nonetheless, the changes that will occur will affect a number of communities, communities that have warmly embraced nearby military i nstallations for a good many years, indeed, in some cases decades. The d epartment will take great care to work with these communities, with the respect that they have earned, and the government stands ready with econ omic assistance. With the strong support of the president, the Department of D efense and other departments of government, are prepared to provide pers onnel transfer and job-training assistance, in collaboration with the De partment of Labor; provide local economic adjustment assistance through the Department of Defense's Office of Economic Adjustment; use our autho rities to accelerate and support reuse needs; and work with the Departme nt of Commerce and other federal agencies to assist local economic recov ery. More information on economic assistance, as well as other inf ormation relating to BRAC, can be found on the department's website, whi ch I believe is shown up there. mil/brac It's helpful to note that many local economies impacted by pr evious BRAC decisions successfully found ways to get positive results ou t of a situation that at first must have seemed dire -- which, of course , is a tribute to the ingenuity and resilience of the American people. For example -- I've never been through a BRAC before, so this is my firs t time; that occurred after I had left the department many years ago. B ut I'm told that within a decade of the base's closure, the community ar ound Pease Air Force Base in New Hampshire employed an aggressive econom ic development plan to generate more than a thousand percent increase in civilian jobs. In Arizona, Williams Air Force Base became the Williams Gatew ay Airport and has attracted many civilian jobs, and its education cente r is bringing in thousands of students. And many cities have turned shutdown Navy bases into new busi ness centers with thousands of new jobs. All affected communities will not be able to replicate such p ositive results, of course, but every effort will be made to assist. With the submission tomorrow, the Defense Department will com plete its statutory role in the BRAC process. All further decisions, de liberations and analysis will occur under the auspices of the statutory BRAC commission, and ultimately from the commission to the president of the United States, and then to the Congress of the United States. Because the BRAC commission can assess more information and w ill have the opportunity to hold hearings and learn from potentially imp acted communities, it's possible that the commission may make some chang es to these recommendations, as have prior BRAC commissions. I'm told t hat prior BRACs have made some 10 to 15 percent changes in what was reco mmended. I do want to thank the BRAC commissioners for agreeing to ser ve our country, and for undertaking this important assignment. I want to ... |
| csua.org/u/c31 -> www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2005/05/mil-050512-dod01.htm In 1961, President Kennedy took office and found a US defen se establishment that was still largely arranged to re-fight World War I I He ordered an extensive consolidation of bases to meet the challenge s of the Cold War that was then flaring into a somewhat dangerous phase. Subsequent presidents have continued to refine US military infrastru cture as the threats to our country have evolved. And today the Department of Defense again is in need of chang e and adjustment. Current arrangements pretty much designed for the Col d War must give way to the new demands of war against extremists and oth er evolving 21st century challenges. At the direction of the president, and with the support of th e Congress, this department has undertaken several initiatives to addres s our new circumstance, including, as you know, we've been changing the US Global Posture, forging new partnerships to fight extremism, transf orming US military to a more agile Joint Expeditionary Force, and refo rming the way the department does its business. Tomorrow, at the direction of the Congress, the department wi ll present another component of that strategy -- its recommendations to the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission for changes to US military installations. Consider the arr ay of issues of concern to this department: making sure the troops have proper equipment, relieving stress on the force, improving the ability of the forces to cooperate jointly, and protecting forces stationed at v ulnerable bases and locations across this country and around the world. If one thinks about those priorities, it clearly makes sense to do all that one can to identify and remove whatever excess exists, to be able t o better address those pressing needs, and by so doing, the American tax payer benefits. This, in essence, is the logic and the imperative of BR AC. Let me make a few comments about that process that has been u ndertaken over the past two and a half years. First, as required by law, the primary factor in each BRAC re commendation has been an assessment of an installation's underlying mili tary value. Indeed, military judgments have played the key role from th e outset, and properly so. In a time of war, whenever we can find ways to increase support for military needs to help the warfighters, we shoul d do no less. Third, for the first time, these deliberations took place wit h an emphasis on jointness. The military recognizes that operating join tly reduces overhead costs, improves efficiencies; and facilitates coope rative training, research and operations. Importantly, these consolidat ions also free up personnel and resources to reduce stress on the force and improve force protection. The department also considered potential contingency and surge requirements, and possible increases in active-dut y troop levels. The current BRAC effort began more than two years ago with th e development of a 20-year force structure plan and an exhaustive top- t o-bottom inventory of US facilities worldwide. In fact, one might say that the process started even earlier with the Global Posture Review th at we began in 2001, now some four years ago. Indeed, the consideration s related to global posture fed into the BRAC analysis, allowing the dep artment to anticipate and prepare for the return of tens of thousands of personnel and their families, and the knowledge gained by the two-year Global Posture Review has informed the BRAC deliberations in important w ays. Through extensive consultation with the service secretaries, with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the combatant commanders, a panel of high-ranking military and civilian officials developed stringent criteri a and conditions and matrices to assess the military business and suppor t operations of the department, as well as every facility and military b ase in the country, taking into account lessons learned from previous BR AC rounds. The word "base" of course includes much more than one traditi onally thinks of, of a military base. It includes ports, airfields, ind ustrial and research facilities, lease space, and the like. In addition to assessments o f military value, the department also examined other key factors, includ ing the economic impact on existing communities in the vicinity of milit ary installations; the ability of existing and potential receiving communities' infrastruc ture to support forces, missions and personnel; and the environmental im pact, including the impact of costs related to environmental restoration , compliance, and waste management. I'm advised that during these deliberations, senior military and civilian leaders invested thousands of hours, and their staffs expen ded tens of thousands of hours to this important work. They examined an estimated 25 million pieces of data, and they considered some 1,000 dif ferent scenarios. Office and t he Department of Defense's inspection and audit agencies. The department is recommending fewer major base closures than had earlier been anticipated, due in part to the return of tens of thou sands of troops through our Global Posture Review, and also due to decis ions to reduce lease space by moving activities from lease space into ow ned facilities. Nonetheless, the changes that will occur will affect a number of communities, communities that have warmly embraced nearby military i nstallations for a good many years, indeed, in some cases decades. The d epartment will take great care to work with these communities, with the respect that they have earned, and the government stands ready with econ omic assistance. With the strong support of the president, the Department of D efense and other departments of government, are prepared to provide pers onnel transfer and job-training assistance, in collaboration with the De partment of Labor; provide local economic adjustment assistance through the Department of Defense's Office of Economic Adjustment; use our autho rities to accelerate and support reuse needs; and work with the Departme nt of Commerce and other federal agencies to assist local economic recov ery. More information on economic assistance, as well as other inf ormation relating to BRAC, can be found on the department's website, whi ch I believe is shown up there. mil/brac It's helpful to note that many local economies impacted by pr evious BRAC decisions successfully found ways to get positive results ou t of a situation that at first must have seemed dire -- which, of course , is a tribute to the ingenuity and resilience of the American people. For example -- I've never been through a BRAC before, so this is my firs t time; that occurred after I had left the department many years ago. B ut I'm told that within a decade of the base's closure, the community ar ound Pease Air Force Base in New Hampshire employed an aggressive econom ic development plan to generate more than a thousand percent increase in civilian jobs. In Arizona, Williams Air Force Base became the Williams Gatew ay Airport and has attracted many civilian jobs, and its education cente r is bringing in thousands of students. And many cities have turned shutdown Navy bases into new busi ness centers with thousands of new jobs. All affected communities will not be able to replicate such p ositive results, of course, but every effort will be made to assist. With the submission tomorrow, the Defense Department will com plete its statutory role in the BRAC process. All further decisions, de liberations and analysis will occur under the auspices of the statutory BRAC commission, and ultimately from the commission to the president of the United States, and then to the Congress of the United States. Because the BRAC commission can assess more information and w ill have the opportunity to hold hearings and learn from potentially imp acted communities, it's possible that the commission may make some chang es to these recommendations, as have prior BRAC commissions. I'm told t hat prior BRACs have made some 10 to 15 percent changes in what was reco mmended. I do want to thank the BRAC commissioners for agreeing to ser ve our country, and for undertaking this important assignment. I want to ... |
| bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=6058 RAW STORY Contrary to White House assertions, the allegations of religious desecrat ion at Guantanamo published by Newsweek May 6 are common among ex-prison ers and have been widely reported outside the United States, RAW STORY h as learned. Advertisement Several former detainees at the Guantanamo and Bagram airba se prisons have reported instances of their handlers sitting or standing on the Quran, throwing or kicking it in toilets, and urinating on it. Where the Newsweek report likely erred was in saying that the US was sl ated to acknowledge desecrating the Quran in internal investigations, an d in relying on a single anonymous source to make grave allegations. One such incident-during which the Koran allegedly was thrown in a pile a nd stepped on-prompted a hunger strike among Guantanamo detainees in Mar . The New York Times interviewed former d etainee Nasser Nijer Naser al-Mutairi May 1, who said the protest ended with a senior officer delivering an apology to the entire camp. "A former interrogator at Guantanamo, in an interview with the Times, con firmed the accounts of the hunger strikes, including the public expressi on of regret over the treatment of the Korans," Times reporters Neil A Lewis and Eric Schmitt wrote in "Inquiry Finds Abuses at Guantanamo Bay. " The hunger strike and apology story was also confirmed by another former detainee, Shafiq Rasul, interviewed by the UK Guardian in 2003 (James Me ek, "The people the law forgot," Guardian, Dec. The toilet incident was reported in the Washington Post in a 2003 intervi ew with a former detainee from Afghanistan: "Ehsannullah, 29, said American soldiers who initially questioned him in Kandahar before shipping him to Guantanamo hit him and taunted him by du mping the Koran in a toilet. It was a very bad situation for us, said E hsannullah, who comes from the home region of the Taliban leader, Mohamm ad Omar. We cried so much and shouted, Please do not do that to the Holy Koran. They would kick the Koran, throw it into the toilet and genera lly disrespect it." Me anwhile, 16 people are dead, countless others injured in riots, and not a single goddamn bloody one of you lefties has the guts to say, Yeah, th at was WRONG to publish a bogus story. Such is your hatred both for the United States of America, and for the President of the United States. No t to even speak of the damage this FALSE story has done to the image tha t we are trying to promote, which is that we are trying to convince the Muslim world that we are not against them. Newsweek must be BANNED from covering the Iraq war, they must be forced t o withdraw their reporters from Iraq, they must not participate in any P entagon briefings, and if charges can be brought against them, Alberto G onzalez better be looking into it, or hes guilty of dereliction of duty . Those scumbag prisoners at Guantanamo of course have a motive to speak ba dly about their incarceration. Of course truth is an option now, or evidence is not a reality you must follow for it is belief, in the natural world , and not your observations that form your reality evidence is only a science to your own opinion of logic which does not go or follow the history of intellect or logic.. What about the thousands of Iraqis killed because your pres wants to get a bit richer? This is a blatant attempt to subdue a media that is already no more than a t en cent whore. Youre probably used to your media and "news" outlets whe re they do lie and distort events on a regular basis. I still expect my news media to report news responsibly. Having said that, I dont think N ewsweek should take full responsibility for the deaths although they con tributed to the cause. They ar e used to non-muslims who are rational and dont believe everything they read. And even if they do believe everything they read, non-muslims on the whole dont go around rioting just because someone said something th at denigrates their religion; |