Posted on 05/16/2005 10:19:56 AM PDT by West Coast Conservative
In an apology to readers this week, Newsweek acknowledged errors in a story alleging U.S. interrogators at Guantanamo Bay desecrated the Quran. The accusations, which the magazine vowed to re-examine, spawned protests in Afghanistan that left 15 dead and scores injured.
Responding to harsh criticism from Muslim leaders worldwide, the Pentagon promised to investigate the charges and pinned the deadly clashes on Newsweek for what it described as "irresponsible" reporting.
"We regret that we got any part of our story wrong, and extend our sympathies to victims of the violence and to the U.S. soldiers caught in its midst," Editor Mark Whitaker wrote in the apology.
The White House said Monday that Newsweek's response was insufficient.
"It's puzzling. While Newsweek now acknowledges that they got the facts wrong, they refuse to retract the story," said presidential spokesman Scott McClellan. "I think there's a certain journalistic standard that should be met. In this instance it was not.
"This was a report based on a single anonymous source that could not substantiate the allegation that was made," McClellan added. "The report has had serious consequences. People have lost their lives. The image of the United States abroad has been damaged. I just find it puzzling."
In its issue dated May 9, Newsweek had reported that U.S. military investigators had found evidence that interrogators placed copies of Islam's holy book in washrooms and had flushed one down the toilet to get inmates to talk.
Whitaker wrote that the magazine's information came from "a knowledgeable U.S. government source," and writers Michael Isikoff and John Barry had sought comment from two Defense Department officials. One declined to respond, and the other challenged another part of the story but did not dispute the Quran charge, Whitaker said.
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.myway.com ...
Not all the blame goes to Newsweek although they certainly did sloppy work to start with and now are making it even worse by acting like Dan Rather. When somebody libels a celebrity they can sue... maybe the army should sue.
1. The people who riot and kill their own friends and neighbors because of a news report are to blame.
2. The abuse allegations in Afghanistan, guantanamo and Abu Gharib make stories like this more believable
3. Our "allies" Pakistan and Saudi Arabia did defend us at all. They could have said something like "wait for the facts" or "this isn't the way America does things"....
It's also worth noting that the Army isn't saying it didn't happen..only that it's not recorded in the interrogation logs.
I, for one, will NEVER read Newsweek, on dead tree or online, until a full and total retraction is issued.
That makes it all absolutely truthful and meaningful!
That's the thing about apologies-- they can't undo damage already done. Dead is dead.
If a house is leaking gas, which could kill in itself but didn't, is ignited because a drunk driver runs into it and kills the occupant, should the drunk driver be charged with murder?
"There are myriad sources that the desecration has occurred, and this is not seriously in dispute."
Then present them please. I call BS.
Qwinn
Newsweek will most likely simply delete the tons of angry emails they are getting, but they will have to pay the return postage on all those pre-paid cards. .
More "Shattered Glass"?
Washington Post
A retraction will not undue the damage and the danger they have willfully imposed on all U.S. and allied servicemen and women.
Oh well, any organization that will hire and print the drivel that comes out of that pig, Eleanor Clift has got to be suspect from the git go.
Newsweak makes Jeff Gannon look like a pro.
Some multimillion dollar lawsuits should emerge too.
I call BS also. I'd like to see those sources too.
Immediately.
I thought Newsweek was owned by AOLTimeWarnerCrosbyStillsNash&Young, or whatever the conglomerate is called now.
pull the creds.
Do any of these "myriad" sources have names? Can you identify any source for this assertion?
I won't be holding my breath.
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.