Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran Desecration

As we first reported Sunday, for two years the media has published allegations by detainees that interrogators at Guantanamo and Kandahar desecrated the Koran, threw it in the toilet and worse. Today, the Washington Post recaps some of the claims. So does The Age (Australia); The Associated Press; Daily Times (Pakistan).

The New York Times calls upon Sen. John Warner, Chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee to investigate the claims. The LA Times calls on the Administration to close Guantanamo and provide detainees with legal protections. The Star Tribune calls the White House "Nixonian" and tells Newsweek to "resist."

We continue to call on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to appoint a special counsel to investigate. Someone should be listening to these 51 members of Congress, not Scott McCellan.

Update: Thanks to Ian at Political Teen for posting the video to today's MSNBC Connected Coast to Coast show that showed a screen shot of this post and talked about it. It was a good segment, also highlighting Daily Kos and Volokh on the nuclear option.

< Sabrina Harman Sentenced to Six Months in Jaill | Frist to Open with Priscilla Owen Weds. Morning >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Richard Aubrey...you are well past racist and into the territory of xenophobia/paranoid schizophrenia. (The fact that PPJ gave you an atta boy is more evidence of this and cause for you to be alarmed). Some advice...don't send missionaries to nail shoes to the soles of the native's feet and they won't get martyred. Ya dig? Now we know that the terrorists have nukes and they are threatening to use them. Here's a clue...they use the word "tactical" when they discuss this. Here's another clue...the first foreign attack on US soil since 1815 was a direct result of our Cold War policies. So the Cold War morphed into the War on Terror and the MIC didn't miss a beat. The usual suspects get paid...while the rest of us have to check the "terror alert level" color. There are threats out there Richard Aubrey...no doubt. But the biggest ones go to the same church that you do.

    This would be the same WaPo that owns Newsweek. Good to see that they can read their own back issues from time to time -- see how much they have screwed the pooch giving Bush a free ride, and how that might backfire....

    Re: Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran (none / 0) (#2)
    by DawesFred60 on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:10 PM EST
    well yes! by the way did you know while you are watching this show, our great nation of freedom and its non government got into the patriot act, section 802 that can put you in prison for a misdemeanor or non terror related so called crimes, like DUI'S... talking back to cops and telling political people off, old alberto gonzales loves this great section, and is using it on you, i like to think of my boy Gonzales as bush's Darth Vader a guy for all seasons of our prison nation. hey we all know were sen. john warner stands and we all know who is getting the money, don't we? and lets not forget the guy for aztlan,Al Gonzale the boy who makes it happen.

    Re: Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran (none / 0) (#3)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:11 PM EST
    Kinda makes you wonder whose side they're on. I mean, they are Americans, aren't they?

    Re: Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran (none / 0) (#4)
    by The Heretik on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:11 PM EST
    We must be living in the twilight of the media gods. Newsweek offers yet another apology here

    Re: Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran (none / 0) (#5)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:11 PM EST
    I'm still baffled that the alleged desecration of a couple copies of the koran gets more attention than the confirmed desecration of thousands of lives. If all the fundamentalists respected life as much as their sacred texts, we'd be in good shape.

    It's a big deal to fundamentalists. There was no reason for us to be in this spot. All we had to do was not start a war of outright aggression. Or having made that tremendous initial error, we could have complied with the treaties we have developed and signed regarding the treatment of human beings. Or having decided not to look at the treaties, we could have behaved like civilized human beings instead of stripping, humiliating, torturing, beating, and killing prisoners. Well, too late for all that now. Jim and his ilk are calling the shots these days. God helps us.

    I concur CA, but if there truly was a god then Shrub would never have been appointed Preznit back in 2000. God would have intervened and made itself Prez. This story matters alot because of the blatant hypocrisy of the Shrub administration when it comes to dealing with Muslims. It truly is a war not only on the Islamic religion but the people that practice it. The majority of Muslims are just peaceful folks until provoked, like the rest of us in the human race. And desecrating their holy text goes a long way to upsetting even the more pacifist of them. Way to go, Col. KooKoo Bananas!

    by all means, have such an investigation. perhaps we can invite Islamists to chant "death to the Jews" in Congress to multicultural applause or explain the niceties of suicide bombing. why indulge these psychopaths.

    Perhaps we can investigate the 52% of illegal activity in the Food-For-Oil scandal that America accounted for (Senate panel conclusion) and why the Senate is trying to smear everyone BUT America on this... Perhaps we can investigate the continuing violation of Ariel Sharon's promise to Bush to follow the Roadmap... Perhaps we can investigate Anne Coulter's suggestion that all Muslims be converted at gunpoint... Ed, do you ever shut up long enough to listen to your drivel?

    Re: Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran (none / 0) (#10)
    by Jlvngstn on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:11 PM EST
    Stacking nude bodies on top of one another. Attaching wires to testicles. Dog leashes. Beatings. Manslaughter. Jessica Lynch. Pat Tillman. What were we thinking, our gov't would never mislead us.

    No, they don't deny it...it's that guys like Ed and PPJ think it's OK when you do it to Arabs...beat up a white kid on vacation in Bermuda and they'll send the Guard...if they aren't already in Iraq by now...

    This commenter is limited to four comments a day. See comment policy for chatterers.

    Blahgdaddy doesn't drivel, Ed...he doesn't check a criminal's party affiliations or his religion before concluding that something is wrong... You hypocrites waged a war that killed thousands, you tortured Iraqis in prisons, you GAVE Saddam the gas in the first place, and now you want to say that Muslims hate America because of a Newsweek story years after the original war... You know what, you guys are real idiots...don't worry, Blagh is not wasting his time with the likes of you chatterers... Anyone have anything intelligent to say?

    Torture is wrong. Making a mockery of anothers belief is wrong. America's "War on Terror" is wrong. Ed is wrong and apparently a mental midget. Granted this is only my opinion, but it's based on reading his posts and not for life of me being able to follow his tortured logic. He dosent seem to be able to respond to direct questions, an epedimic problem in this Nation.

    It's tragically amusing the way this admin. has latched onto the meme that it's all the media's fault (again), forgetting that many Americans have no trouble recalling that it was admin. actions at Gitmo, and the invasion of Iraq on the cheap that led to abuses at Abu Garab that created the conditions that made it oh-so-easy for the rest of the world to believe that the US would act this way. That said, IMO someone at Newsweek should lose their job, and show the media, unlike the current admin. believes in accountability at the highest levels.

    Torture is wrong. If we have done bad things, worse evils should be allowed to flourish. We had Japanese internment camps/therefore we cannot say that Nazi death camps were wrong or oppose the Nazis. the simple logic of the posters boiled down to its ultimate conclusion. thank God you were not in charge in WWII.

    My goodness, a troll acknowledges that Torture is wrong. Then, after this astonishing intellectual leap, it devolves into mere wingnuttery.

    Re: Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran (none / 0) (#18)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:11 PM EST
    CA writes - "Jim and his ilk are calling the shots these days. God helps us." Actually I'm not in charge, yet. So perhaps God is helping you. Blagh - Yes, you drivel. (Which doesn't make sense. But perhaps we can use it the same way "partenting" became a verb.) BTW - We have indicted one dude. It'll be interesting to see how many French, Germans and Russians get punished. And how many members of the UN.

    Re: Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran (none / 0) (#19)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:11 PM EST
    Re: Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran (none / 0) (#21)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:11 PM EST
    You know you've defeated a liberal in an agrument when the best counter they come up with is, "Racist, wignut" or some other personal attack. ON topic.... If these allegations have been previously released, then why is there such an outcry from Muslims based on this one small article in Newsweek? Didn't they already have reports, prior to this one, that the could get all fired up about? Was this artcile really the "Cause" behind the riots or was there something else? Are we getting the whole story.... OH my God, BUSH LIED AGAIN... It was Haliburton, they control Newsweek. Oh, oh, ummm, nevermind....sorry.

    still can't think of a reason why we should not have given up in WWII given our wrongs. To make things clear: is our having done wrong sufficient in your eyes to justify giving in to a far greater evil. apparently, in this dimension, yes.

    Re: Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran (none / 0) (#23)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    Gen. Meyers has stated that the uproar from the Muslims has little to do with the newsweek article.

    Re: Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran (none / 0) (#24)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    Ed - your logic defies description.

    PPJ- Sorry, Blagh was away for a couple of hours and doesn't know what he's supposed to be looking at...could you refresh his memory? Baby problems...

    This commenter is limited to four comments a day. See comment policy for chatterers.

    Maybe he's gone home...Blagh doesn't remember what the link was supposed to be for...maybe tomorrow....

    As the Bush administration heaps scorn on Newsweek magazine for its Koran desecration story, it worth remembering the President's own words during his April 13, 2004 press conference last year. Asked to name his biggest mistake, a modest (and incoherent) Bush responded: "I'm sure something will pop into my head here...maybe I'm not as quick on my feet as I should be in coming up with one." With the White House and its conservative media goose-steppers pressuring Newsweek for an apology, I thought I might help President Bush keep track of his own: For more, see: "Newsweek Aftermath: The Bush Mea Culpa Watch"

    Re: Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran (none / 0) (#29)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    The allegations didn't spark rioting. Perhaps the local powerbrokers didn't need them as an excuse just then. Some reporters are telling us their sources say the report was used to whip up the rioters, whether or not the article was the ultimate cause. Anyway, since it was a false article, it ought not to have been published. We miss a theme here, I think. That is, there is a huge portion of Islam which demands the most scrupulous respect in the tiniest details, transgressing which will get you or somebody killed. See, for example Miss World contest in Nigeria. Doesn't that seem strange? When Serrano produced his Piss Christ, Christians wrote to their congresscritters and asked that federal funds not be used to do that kind of thing any longer. When the Muslim terrorists desecrated the Church of The Nativity, no Christians rioted. When the Taliban destroyed the Bamiyan Buddhas, no Buddhists rioted and killed people. When Muslims desecrate Jewish holy places, Jews do not riot and kill people. Not only do Muslims demand the utmost respect in painful detail, they have absolutely no interest in fulfilling the same obligation to the rest of us. In fact, when Muslims desecrate the Koran, sometimes they get killed and sometimes it's okay. One of the latter times was when a Gitmo inmate used a Koran (US Army issue) to stop up a toilet. That's okay. They can booby-trap a Koran. That's okay. They can use mosques as fortifications and arms depots. That's okay. But shooting at somebody in a mosque who's shooting at you is disrepecting Islam. When I was in college, somebody gave me a book about peace in the world and so forth. It was written by a Turkish scholar who had, iirc, served with the UN. I don't recall the book, but I recall one item in his bio, written by somebody else in the forward. He spent several years as a young man in the Balkans "fighting for the faith". That, given his age, would have been prior to WW I. So he was fighing with Turkish forces to Ottoman control of another country. His bio called that "fighting for the faith". His book neither defended that nor mentioned it. So I wondered then as I do now. Is "fighting for the faith" just what Muslims say when somebody is in the military? Like we say "service"? Or do they really, down-deep think that fighting to maintain occupation of another country really IS fighting for Islam the religion as ordained by Allah, as opposed to just fighting for a nation? It seems there may not be much difference. Not attending to the question might be a mistake.

    Richard Aubrey...seems to me it's a couple non-Muslim countries that recently invaded and occupied a Muslim country. Whose faith were/are those country's armies fighting for?

    Re: Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran (none / 0) (#31)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    Ernesto. I forgot. Is it you or Che on the too-silly-to-bother-with list? On the chance you're not on it, yet, I'll answer. Nobody's. The question you ask is a non sequitur stemming from the rear of the brain in the ain't-I-cute sublobe. Okay? Now, for adults reading this, the question is whether we in the West understand what drives the Muslim fanatics. Yes, there's the support of Israel, but there's also the Tragedy of Andalusia, which OBL mentioned after 9-11 right before and after not mentioning Israel. Saudi Arabia just arrested forty Christians for something. Islamic wackjobs are killing Christians and Buddhists on East Timor and in Thailand. And in the Phillipines. A Christian school was just grenaded by Islamic wackjobs, killing two kids and a teacher and injuring many more. That was in Pakistan, as I recall. On the other hand, reports are that the terrorists in Quaim (recent op in Iraq) were so miserable to the folks in town that the locals fought them, and finding themselved outgunned, called on the Iraqi defense ministry who called....The US Marines. Good call if I have to say something nice about jarheads. This is not a war against a nation-state. But when nation states actively, or because they have no power, support or house the non-state actors, we have a problem. With the exception of Antarctica, all dry land in the world is possessed by one or another nation state. To say that terrorists should be immune because going after them would involve moving on another nation state is silly and nobody really believes it unless it's useful for bashing Bush. As one observer mentioned, we knew something of the Soviet nuke capabilities, but were worried about their intentions. Had their intentions been vile, their capacity would have allowed them to do something really awful. We know the terrorists' intentions. That is, destroy us. We don't know their nuke capacity, but it's certain that if they get one they will use it ASAP. They've already tried to kill fifty-thousand of us, which is the number of folks the WTC would have had indoors about an hour later. They had one plane heading for the capital--pilots say the White House comes up too suddenly if you're flying low to make a good target. No time to correct. But the Dome shows up for miles. Now, suppose they had a nuke. Would they be too scrupulous to use it? Against whom would we retaliate? After the, say, third nuke goes off in this country, we would glassify a large portion of the Middle East. Just in case. Islam's problem is that the turbulent sons they find it difficult to reproach want to go after India, China, and Russia, too. Those are three nuclear powers. If the terrorists manage to win, Islam disappears by virtue of the vast majority of its people dying in nuclear blasts. Seeing this as a good possibility does not mean liking the prospect, although I suspect a number of you are winding up to accuse me of wanting to extirminate all Muslims. Just remember, I've been dealing with lefties a long time. Only your speed to the moral bottom surprises me. Oh, yeah. Paul in LA is cranking up his "racist" thing. Go ahead. I know you know you're BSing because you can't afford to address the question. In the old days, you figured we didn't know you knew you were BSing. We did. We do.

    Re: Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran (none / 0) (#32)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    Blagh - PPJ wasn't put on this earth to refresh your memory. RA - Nice.

    Posted by Patrick: "You know you've defeated a liberal in an agrument when the best counter they come up with is, "Racist, wignut" That's not an argument, Patrick, that's a diagnosis. Try denying it. You support an invasion whose stated purpose and ACTUAL purpose are 180 degrees apart. The only way you can justify that is if you are: 1) Racist 2) an Idiot 3) Violent (especially the violence of cowardice) 4) Corrupt Do I need to mention? 5) Unamerican It's a simple chart, and it covers the necessary bases. Instead of spending $2 a week or so on blowing up a sovereign country in order to fracture it into territories and thus keep airbases there, the obvious proper use of that money would be paying to bring a halt to ALL reduction of rain forest on the earth. That would have the greatest impact on LOWERING the climate that human beings currently know how to do. But instead, Bush blows up some very innocent people. And then you racist buffoons wonder why people call you racists when you support that behavior.

    $2 = $2 Billion

    Re: Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran (none / 0) (#36)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    Did I nail Paul in LA, or did I nail him? It appearrs that all we have going out on the west coast is a reflex. That is, in the neurological sense, like blinking. Ernesto, I've got a little list and.... dum dumdedum... will never be missed.

    Re: Media Acknowledges Prior Allegations of Koran (none / 0) (#37)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    Nuts. "never will be missed." Things rhyme and scan for a reason, which didn't help me here. BTW. "Tactical". as in "tactical" nuke? As opposed to city-buster? So? Set off three "Tactical" nukes in the US and see if that makes a difference.