Posted on 03/14/2006 1:51:40 PM PST by Former Military Chick
The online magazine Salon is challenging the identity of a man profiled by The New York Times in a front-page article on Saturday who says he is the iconic hooded figure in a published photograph who was abused by Americans at Abu Ghraib prison in 2003 and 2004.
Salon bases its challenge on an examination of a set of 280 Abu Ghraib photographs it has been studying for several weeks and an interview with an official of the Army's Criminal Investigation Command, known as the C.I.D., who says the man identified by The Times is not the detainee in the photograph.
On Monday, Chris Grey, chief spokesman for the investigations unit, asked about the challenge, confirmed to The Times in an e-mail message: "We have had several detainees claim they were the person depicted in the photograph in question. Our investigation indicates that the person you have is not the detainee who was depicted in the photograph released in connection with the Abu Ghraib investigation.
"As always, we will take this information into consideration in the course of our investigative duties to determine if there is any credibility to the person's allegations."
The man identified by The Times, Ali Shalal Qaissi, often called Haj Ali, was also interviewed and described as the hooded man forced to stand on a box attached to electric wires in an article in Vanity Fair and a broadcast on PBS.
Joan Walsh, the editor of Salon, said: "It is possible that two different people are pictured. We are not saying that nothing like this happened to Mr. Qaissi. But the C.I.D. believes there is only one person in the photographs."
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The saying "isn't that calling the kettle black" comes to mind.
It would be nice if Salon, NYT would take other issues as seriously to ensure that they get it right.
Does it seem odd that people are lining up claiming to be the guy in the picture... I thought this was supposed to be humiliating.
C'mon, people - it is not whether the NYT got its facts straight, it was the message that is important...the NYT long ago has abdicated its role of presenting facts, it is the message that counts. After all, the end justifies the means to Punch, Pinch, Piss-ant, whatever.
Treasonous Antique Media.
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.