Does Rather's Cousin Work at Newsweek?

[Jeff Higgins]

What has happened to investigative reporting? It seems the need to stir up controversy and grab "the scoop" from competitors has long since gotten out of control in our esteemed media. Newsweek is the latest to stumble, and this time their eagerness and lack of research to back up their story has resulted in innocent deaths. The new standard seems to be to rush it into print or on the air before a proper investigation has been completed and all sources have been verified. In this case, a mere retraction of the story seems pretty weak. How about prosecuting the editor(s) responsible? This kind of "journalism" has no place in the mainstream, formerly respected media. Have they all gone the way of The Enquirer?


http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050517/D8A4KEU00.html

[Dantilla]

Always remember the number one job of a newspaper/magazine/TV station/radio station/whatever else type of media:

To make money.

[Craig 930 RS]

"Esteemed media?" WTF???????
Never has, never will.

[pwd72s]

"mainstream media"? They are all cousins, they all lean to the left. To get the right slant, talk radio. To get both slants? To the complete extremes? The net. Overall, I hope it's good that "mainstream" is no longer the sole source of info. This may make people think, and we all know how dangerous that might be...

[911pcars]

Or.... another possibility (since we're told what the truth is); the story is true, but the administration wants to limit the bad press the US is getting. So they politely or otherwise advise the "media"; they ask the powers-to-be at Newsweek to post a retraction in the name of national security. I'm not saying that's the case, just one scenario.

If you believe everything the administration tells you, you are their kind of electorate.

Sherwood

[pwd72s]

Originally posted by 911pcars
Or.... another possibility (since we're told what the truth is); the story is true, but the administration wants to limit the bad press the US is getting. So they politely or otherwise advise the "media"; they ask the powers-to-be at Newsweek to post a retraction in the name of national security. I'm not saying that's the case, just one scenario.

If you believe everything the administration tells you, you are their kind of electorate.

Sherwood

Sherwood? Did this personal rule also apply to the previous administration? If so, I tip my hat...

[bryanthompson]

If you ask any reporter why they got into the field of reporting, will they say, "to report the news fair and accurately" or will they say "to make a difference"?

(again with the quote rule. it's too late and I'm too tired to think about it. I know I effed it up.)

[widebody911]

Sorry guys, but there are enough other reports of religion-based torture techniques that the "retraction" comes out pretty thin. Even one of the right's favorite urban legends - the one about Pershing dousing Muslims with pig blood - is religion-based torture (http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pershing.htm). Hmm. Now the ***** has hit the fan, and you try to blame it on the media? Priceless!

Face it, to the rest of the world, the US, the military, and particularly it's president, look like the biggest *******s right now. Write it off as 'pranks' all you want, but the rest of the world takes this stuff seriously. With each passing day, and each human rights violation, this is looking more like the Crusades for Oil and less like (insert list of Bush lies about the reason for the war here).

[911pcars]

"Did this personal rule also apply to the previous administration? If so, I tip my hat..."

This rule applies to any administration. Where does it say in the Constitution that we the people should automatically trust the government to do what's right versus politically expedient? That's why we have various branches of govt. to apply checks and balances so no one branch wields too much power.

If you happen upon:
- a govt. that restricts the press in asking valid questions,
- a govt. that holds secret policy-making meetings,
- a govt. that furthers ideological objectives under the guise of phrases such as "freedom" and "democracy",
- a govt. that appoints like-minded loyalists to condone and carry out an agenda rather than a cross-section of independent-minded patriots,
- a govt. that reduces personal freedoms under the law of war and terrorist fear,
- a govt. that values unilateral military strength over international law,
- a govt. that favors one segment of society over another (e.g. corporations vs. private citizen, religious vs. non-religious, rich vs. poor, one race over others, strong vs. weak, etc.),
- a govt. that stresses image over substance,
- a govt. that minimizes checks and balances ......

..... then you've got a govt., my friend, you (we) should worry about.

Any resemblance to current and past governments is purely coincidental.

Sherwood

[Mule]

Slice it any way you like, the bottom line is this. The practice of Islam places your life at risk to an infinitely higher degree than any other accepted religion. Catholic? you can visit St. Peter's square all you like & you will never witness a killing. That is unless a muslim sneaks in to try to kill the pope. Baptist? you can find the most revved up, fire & brimstone, bible thumpin' tent revival on any backwoods hilltop and you won't witness a killing. Jewish? go to the wailing wall & again outside of the occasional muslim suicide bomber, you wont witness a killing.

However, if you're in muslimland and word gets out that someone thousands of miles away MAY have defiled a book, 16 die. Also if you fulfill your duty to allah & go to the hadj, bring your camera & your kevlar. They always kill a few at that party.

But we have everybody from George Bush to Louie Farakahn saying that the practicioners of the religion of peace are just like everybody else. They just want to raise their families & worship allah. Hopefully they won't get killed in the process.

Widebutty, if this is "the crusades for oil," let's get the f**k on with it. The latest news is that Saudi Arabia is the largest source of insurgent so let's whip their a$$ & take their oil too while we've got the army over there. The rest of the world might talk behind our back but won't say squat to our face. Since we have the oil, they'll have to kiss our a$$es just like they've been doing to the mulims.

LIGHT IT OFF!

[bryanthompson]

Even if this were true, isn't it allowed under our Constitution? I mean, morons can burn our flag here, they're free to flush pages of the Bible down the toilet. They can take a picture of Mary smeared with feces, or put a crucifix in a jar of urine, and get away with it because it's 'art.'

Even though this Koran incident didn't happen, what if it did? What if the soldiers were just 'expressing themselves' in an artistic way?

My religion is offended every day by the secular left, and you don't see Catholics starting riots and killing innocent people.

[widebody911]

Even if this were true, isn't it allowed under our Constitution?

Absolutely. Still doesn't make it a good idea. I could burn a bible in front of a church on Sunday morning in Alabama. Perfectly legal, but it would probably be a good idea to update my will first.

However, legality aside, we've invaded a Muslim country under the guise of trying to 'help' them. They're not happy about it, but we keep insisting we're trying to help. Add in the Gitmo and Abu Graib incidents along with the "God is telling me what to do" mentality of GWB, and it starts to look like a holy war.

As an aside, it looks like there's a Crusades movie coming out. Perfect timing.

[Tim Hancock]

The extremist kill people, yet the US haters only choose to be offended by someone flushing something down the toilet (which may not have even happened). Next they whine that the Bush lovers get their news from FOX or Rush instead of their beloved biased media. Will they acknowledge that the Italian media, Dan Rather and Newsweek were wrong to release their stories? I doubt it. Their pure hate for W outweighs their common sense IMO.

[bryanthompson]

Thom, we're not the ones making it into a holy war. They are the ones trying to kill the infidels and that believe God is directly guiding their actions. They are the ones who believe they will get 72 virgins for killing innocents. We are the good guys in this. Our soldiers are doing it out of a love of their country and freedom, not because they were duped into believing something.

[Mule]

Tim, you hit the nail on the head. "They choose to be offended." This is the ultimate tenent of the religion of political correctness. Death of thousands, no problem. Book defacement, they'll riot & kill. Spike Lee was here in town recently. He made a movie called Bamboozled. The main characters were black guys in black face called Mantan & Sleep & Eat. The band was "The Alabama Porch Monkeys." They repeatedly referred to clothing by Timmy Hillnigger. No offense taken. If I did it, totally different.

If a word or action offends you then it matters not the source. All this chosen offense is the biggest load of cr*p I've ever seen.

[cmccuist]

Originally posted by widebody911
Face it, to the rest of the world, the US, the military, and particularly it's president, look like the biggest *******s right now. Write it off as 'pranks' all you want, but the rest of the world takes this stuff seriously. With each passing day, and each human rights violation, this is looking more like the Crusades for Oil and less like (insert list of Bush lies about the reason for the war here).

Oil!!??!?! WTF??! That's like saying the Bay of Pigs was about cigars. This has nothing to do with oil! Thom, you're letting your hatred of W get in the way of your normally sane reasoning. This is about Islamofacism and its spread across Northern Africa, the middle east, Indochina and into Europe. Islamofacism is the communism of the 21st century.

Thom, you like to bring up the crusades and the inquisition. Those dark times, although sanctioned by the "church," were decidedly un-Christian. The Savior never intended for people to be tortured or butchered for not believing in Him. Quite the contrary.

Muslims on the other hand, are unusually prone to torture and kill in the name of Allah. You want to talk about a crusade! These freaks have committed genocide all across sub-saharan African with the UN playing the role of the three monkeys (see, hear and speak no evil).

This is the domino theory all over again. Everyone talks a good game about doing something to bring peace in the middle east, but W (and Isreal and Palestine now that Arafat is yuking it up with Hitler in hell) is the only one doing something about it.

Oh, and dropping a pair of tightey-whiteys on a terrorists head and getting him and the other terrorists to build a naked pyramid is not torture. Sorry, with the History channel running daily documentaries about real prison abuse, the Abu Graib prison DOES look like a fraternity prank gone bad. That's why it's not getting any traction except with those who already hate the US like France, fantical muslims and Ted Kennedy.

[bryanthompson]

hahaha! Look at this article: http://reuters.myway.com/article/20050517/2005-05-17T114926Z_01_N17451090_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-RELIGION-PAKISTAN-KORAN-DC.html

"The apology and retraction are not enough," Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed told Reuters.

"They should understand the sentiments of Muslims and think 101 times before publishing news which hurt feelings of Muslims."

But they don't think 101 times before airing false stories on their networks. They don't think at all about the people they support and who they might offend. What morons, it's no wonder why liberals have such an affection for muslims.

[widebody911]

Ok, if 'fake' stories must be retracted, then why wasn't the Right clamoring for a retraction of the Jessica Lynch story?

[bryanthompson]

well if you can 'quote' words to make it 'appear' that they have some 'underlying falsehood' then you obviously aren't living in the place the rest of us call 'reality' and don't belong in such an 'argument' where 'true' and 'false' aren't something that are 'impressions.'

[Mule]

Muslims Riot Over Spelling of 'Koran' in U.S. Media
by Scott Ott

(2005-05-17) -- As many as 25 people died and dozens more were injured during riots in Afghanistan today which erupted over what one Muslim cleric called "the U.S. media's desecration-by-mispelling" of the name of Islam's most holy book.

Indeed, American editors have failed to reach consensus on how to render the holy book's name. Some spell it with a 'K' others with a 'Q' and -- perhaps most offensive to Muslim sensibilities -- some insert a meaningless apostrophe in the middle of the word.

"They're mocking our religion and our God by using a wide variety of spellings for the holy book," said the unnamed imam. "Journalists and editors are the stormtroopers of America's war on Islam. They're trying to humiliate and intimidate us with alternate and phonetic spellings, sowing seeds of doubt about the book Allah gave to the Prophet. We will fill the streets with the blood of the infidels and anyone else who gets in the way."

The latest casualities followed the deaths of 17 people in weekend riots over an inaccurate story in Newsweek magazine about a report that U.S. military guards had flushed a Koran down a toilet at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility.

The cleric, who requested anonymity due to the sensitivity of the issue, denied that the latest uprising on the Arab street was simply part of the 'regularly-scheduled annual riot season'.

"Our previously-scheduled generic riots have been preempted by these special, issue-oriented violent mobs," he said. "Americans have nobody to blame but themselves for inflaming the passions of these peaceful religious people."