NYP: NEWSWEEK WEASELS

New York Post ^ | May 18, 2005 | Editorial

[OESY]

Twenty-four hours after first apologizing for, and then

[OESY]

It is reprehensible that Newsweek and other liberal MSM organs don't feel the same responsibility to limit civilian casualties that the Pentagon has incorporated into its mission.

[Calpernia]

Thread from yesterday:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1405013/posts

My son just called from Afghanistan....

I have posted a few times before; my son is a Marine stationed at a primitive firebase in eastern Afghanistan. They conduct constant missions rooting out insurgents along the Pakistani border; he has been there for about 8 months, due to leave there mid-June for a break, then possibly to Iraq. Today I got a call from him at my work; never had him do that. Satellite phone, big time delay............."Just wanted to see how everyone is......." he says. Some more pleasantries, and then my son, who has never been too vocal about current events or politics, says that the small town they are near has experienced major rioting, and a military truck in a convoy was blown up (no fatality), the formerly hospitable townsfolk were stoning them as they passed, and the damage to the general climate between them has become very bad. He was quite angry and felt betrayed by Newsweek and other media, and singled out USA Today for inflicting similar harm over time. Just his words, not mine, out of the blue today, at my work. Surprising.

[randog]

Since when did the Pentagon become a Newsweek editor?

[jos65]

After all, he said, Pentagon officials did not initially dispute the story, which reported that interrogators had taken pages of a Koran and flushed them down the toilet. In fact, "we were not challenged on any aspect of [the story] for 11 days."

DOES THIS MAKE IT TRUE? IT APPEARS THAT NEWSWEEK IS VERY HYPOCRITICAL WHEN IT COMES TO THE PENTAGON.

[SusaninOhio]

I still say - Leavenworth.

These idiots are falling back on the crap that they passed the info by the Administration, and by the Administration's not responding, it was tacitly "agreeing" with the "facts" in the article.

It't perhaps time to tell the folks at Newsweek that if they did in fact pass the info by the Administration, they were completely and totally snookered the same way that Dan Rather was - the White House knew that he was hanging himself and they simply offered him the rope to do it with.

Stupidly, he accepted, and no amount of blaming the White House worked for him. It won't work for Newsweek either, if we keep the facts out in the open and refuse to let them die on the vine as Newsweek and most of the MSM would like them to.

[tahotdog]

Twenty-four hours after first apologizing for, and then — as criticism mounted — retracting a bogus story about alleged U.S. military misbehavior at Guantanamo, Newsweek's editors still seem to think they're the victims of the whole sordid saga.

"Everyone involved in the reporting process conducted themselves professionally," the magazine's editor, Mark Whitaker, insisted yesterday in several interviews. "We went by the book."

These cretins are too stupid to experience shame; it would therefore be good if they could be taught to experience fear. Hanging a few of them might do that.

[Dallas59]

Newspeek GROW UP and accept responsibility for your errors! Jeese...what a bunch of sissies.

[Lazamataz]

Twenty-four hours after first apologizing for, and then — as criticism mounted — retracting a bogus story about alleged U.S. military misbehavior at Guantanamo, Newsweek's editors still seem to think they're the victims of the whole sordid saga.

And the New York Times is leading the charge against the Administration for it's horrendous behavior. After all, poor little Newsweakling is a victim, and BUSH IS TO BLAME.

[Lazamataz]

Since when did Newsweak actually report facts?

[randog]

You gotta love the irony of the press screaming, "We're the victim of NO government censorship!"

[roses of sharon]

That DNC rag is just pissed off that wrong people died, it was supposed to be US soldiers.

Which was their entire reason for publishing interrogation techniques to our enemies in the first place.

The same for the Rather/Mapes publishing of prison photos months ago.

Their goal is to defeat Bush/US efforts in Iraq, and the only way to do that is to incite violence against our soldiers.

(there was and is no public right to know, just as they do not publish rape victims names, ect)

[B.O. Plenty]

The the government official who was the "reliable source" is the true traitor and weasle in this case. This person is an un-American creep who is actually more despicable than, say, old soviet spys. He, or it, is making a good living from money ripped from the taxpayers, and is working hard at bringing down the very system that he, or it, takes care of him and his family. If anyone in this country needs to be stoned, it is this person.

He needs to be exposed and deported to the sh!t hole country of his choice......

[Socratic]

You gotta love the irony of the press screaming, "We're the victim of NO government censorship!"

Quote of the week!

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Certainly wasn't the AP Stylebook, Mark.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I wouldn't dispute the report that you have quit beating your wife...

[ClearCase_guy]

the government official who was the "reliable source" is the true traitor

Maybe I've just missed it, but I have not seen much speculation as to who this person is. First two thoughts that came to my mind:

1) Colin Powell -- the source (I believe) is ex-government, and Colin is not always our friend.
2) Deepthroat -- the source does not exist at all.

[SusaninOhio]

It does sort of look that way, doesn't it?

This is definitely something that needs to be thrown in the faces of the MSM whenever possible. It would make for some great one-liners if old Scott Mc. could work himself up to a offensive position at WH briefings instead of staying on the defensive and sounding pretty weak the way he generally does.

In fact, I would love to hear a Pentagon or WH spokesman say something about 'well, we did give you the rope - and you did make an ass of yourself - so why do you think that is in any way, anyone's fault but your own?'

I thought that problem with taking responsiblity that we have been seeing across the country, was pretty much a problem with the younger generation, but I see that it is a character flaw of many 'journalists' of all ages.

The internet, in my opinion, was largely responsible for Dan Rather's 'early retirement' and it can do the same for Newsweek. Early incarceration would be a fine thing, for those folks.

And let's take a cue from Israel and start building those walls - I think that would be a great idea. Maybe start with those properties on the borders, and help the property owners who would like the protection of a wall, to build a section on their own piece of land - There would be wide open areas, but the sections of wall would funnel the illegals thru those open areas.

[Bar-Face]

It must have been, that evil genius, that Svengali, that political mastermind, that mind behind Bush. Oh no, Gasp. Karl Rove!

[thoughtomator]

"Everyone involved in the reporting process conducted themselves professionally," the magazine's editor, Mark Whitaker, insisted yesterday in several interviews. "We went by the book."

And that's the problem... the profession is rancid, and the book just plain sucks.

[sydbas]

After all, he said, Pentagon officials did not initially dispute the story, which reported that interrogators had taken pages of a Koran and flushed them down the toilet. In fact, "we were not challenged on any aspect of [the story] for 11 days."

Can you imagine how the MSM hypocrites would have reacted if the Pentagon had disputed the story or challenged them and then the story turned out to be true?