Two anonymous Newsweak "sources" moments before contacting Michael Isikoff.
Posted on 05/16/2005 8:49:35 PM PDT by filbert
CAMBRIDGE, MA, May 15, 2005 Contrary to White House spin, the allegations of religious desecration at Guantanamo published by Newsweek on May 9, 2005, are common among ex-prisoners and have been widely reported outside the United States. Several former detainees at the Guantanamo and Bagram prisons have reported instances of their handlers sitting or standing on the Quran, throwing or kicking it in toilets, and urinating on it. Prior to the Newsweek article, the New York Times reported a Guantanamo insider asserting that the commander of the facility was compelled by prisoner protests to address the problem and issue an apology.
One such incident (during which the Quran was allegedly thrown in a pile and stepped on) prompted a hunger strike among Guantanamo detainees in March 2002. Regarding this, the New York Times in a May 1, 2005, article interviewed a former detainee, Nasser Nijer Naser al-Mutairi, who said the protest ended with a senior officer delivering an apology to the entire camp. And the Times reports: "A former interrogator at Guantanamo, in an interview with the Times, confirmed the accounts of the hunger strikes, including the public expression of regret over the treatment of the Korans." (Neil A. Lewis and Eric Schmitt, "Inquiry Finds Abuses at Guantanamo Bay," New York Times, May 1, 2005.)
The hunger strike and apology story is also confirmed by another former detainee, Shafiq Rasul, interviewed by the UK Guardian in 2003 (James Meek, "The People the Law Forgot," Dec. 3, 2003). It was also confirmed by former prisoner Jamal al-Harith in an interview with the Daily Mirror (Rosa Prince and Gary Jones, "My Hell in Camp X-Ray," Daily Mirror, March 12, 2004).
The toilet incident was reported in the Washington Post in a 2003 interview 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 dumping the Quran in a toilet. 'It was a very bad situation for us,' said Ehsannullah, who comes from the home region of the Taliban leader, Mohammad Omar. 'We cried so much and shouted, "Please do not do that to the Holy Quran."'
(Marc Kaufman and April Witt, "Out of Legal Limbo, Some Tell of Mistreatment," Washington Post, March 26, 2003.)
Also citing the toilet incident is testimony by Asif Iqbal, a former Guantanamo detainee who was released to British custody in March 2004 and subsequently freed without charge:
"The behavior of the guards towards our religious practices as well as the Quran was also, in my view, designed to cause us as much distress as possible. They would kick the Quran, throw it into the toilet, and generally disrespect it."
(Center for Constitutional Rights [.pdf], Aug. 4, 2004.)
The claim that U.S. troops at Bagram prison in Afghanistan urinated on the Quran was made by former detainee Mohamed Mazouz, a Moroccan, as reported in the Moroccan newspaper, La Gazette du Maroc. (Abdelhak Najib, "Les Américains pissaient sur le Coran et abusaient de nous sexuellement," April 12, 2005.) An English translation is available on the Cage Prisoners site (which describes itself as a "nonsectarian Islamic human rights Web site").
Tarek Derghoul, another of the British detainees, similarly cites instances of Quran desecration in an interview with Cage Prisoners.
Desecration of the Quran was also mentioned by former Guantanamo detainee Abdul Rahim Muslim Dost and reported by the BBC in early May 2005. (Haroon Rashid, "Ex-Inmates Share Guantanamo Ordeal," May 2, 2005.)
"Calgacus" has been employed as a researcher in the national security field for 20 years.
Gee, American-hating prisoners all claiming the one thing that's sure to upset their fellow America-haters. Who'd a thunk it?
Simple solution. Ban the Koran from Gitmo naval base.
Assuming he wrote the story yesterday, it might help to see what he thinks today now that NEWSSTINK retracted the story.
CBS actually had good coverage of this tonight (I think CBS is actually the most balanced network on the evening news now...not too bad). They kept reiterating that though other prisoners claim abuse, they can't be trusted because they are trained in effective propaganda tactics etc. And they made it clear there is no support for the Newsweek report.
Then, during a story about Iraq, they showed the result of an insurgent survey on an Islamist website, and the vast majority of insurgents are Saudis.....Iraqis don't even make up 4 percent!
"A former interrogator at Guantanamo, in an interview with the Times, confirmed the accounts of the hunger strikes, including the public expression of regret over the treatment of the Korans."
Read the above again. It confirms the hunger strikes, and it confirms the comments made to end the hunger strikes. It does not confirm the actual treatment of the Korans.
And of course, this source is completely unidentified. We have to take their word for it.
Next:
"a Guantanamo insider"
The same "insider"? Completely unidentified. We have to take their word for it.
Here are ALL of the other sources for this article:
the allegations...are common among "ex-prisoners"
"Several former detainees"
"a former detainee"
"another former detainee"
"former prisoner"
"a former detainee"
"a former Guantanamo detainee"
"former detainee"
"another of the British detainees"
"former Guantanamo detainee"
Forget bias one way or the other--an article sourced to completely anonymous sources.
Wow, I'm convinced!
I'm actually starting to be a bit fearful that the MSM will go too far one of these days, and find to their (and our) sorrow that the First Amendment is part of the liberals' beloved "living document."
I think that's all too possible, and would be an absolute disaster.
We need to figure out a way to ensure that journalism stays at least somewhat responsible. Firing Isikoff and his editor (and taking this guy "Calgacus" to the woodshed too would be a good start.
Yes, "News"week got it right by retracting the story.
Tip for you skeptics out there: DO NOT, repeat, DO NOT try flushing a Quran down your toilet! Chapters and verses go down reasonably well, in small quantities. But the covers -- especially those hard covers -- are a real bitch!
Hopefully the plumber who's coming tomorrow is not Muslim.
I'm not comfortable with policing the First Amendment in any way. But look at CBS--its credibility took a huge hit on Rathergate. I think Newsweek is going to take a hit on this. Good. THAT is what we need, and it also helps the press--they will want the ability to brag that they get their facts right.
The first thing that should have made you suspicious is the Cambridge, MA, byline.
And if you look at their list of "network" affiliates, you'll see MichaelMoore.com, Antiwar.com, The Nation magazine,...
http://www.mediachannel.org/affiliates/all/
Oh, man, that list of lib sites is going to be fabulous for future loony left oppo research! Heh heh heh. . .
I thought Mediachannel.org wasn't 'welcome' on this site...
Two anonymous Newsweak "sources" moments before contacting Michael Isikoff.
I dunno, I'm not posting copied content from that site; I'm just trying to put what someone else posted from that site in context...
That's the most charming photo I've seen yet of Reid and Pelosi!
makes you puke and turn yellow if you go to those sites...
(lol)
No way! Aw heck . . . if I screwed up, Mods, do yer duty!
Anybody got a link of the proscribed sites handy?
That would solve things.
;-)
bttt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.