Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (104267)	5/16/2005 6:32:53 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

hmmmm.. 'page not found' (retraction story on drudge...cnn)

To: Bill who wrote (104267)	5/16/2005 9:57:41 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

"NewsWeek has just completely retracted the story." Completely? And bolded, even! Why, a "complete" retraction would imply that it hadn't happened, wouldn't it? This is what it actually retracted. It can't retract the testimony that's already on the record, or the article in ANSA or the one in the Philadelphia Inquirer. None of which the administration gainsaid. Newsweek can retract this much, however, and should: ``Based on what we know now, we are retracting our original story that an internal military investigation had uncovered Koran abuse at Guantanamo Bay,' the magazine said in a statement from editor Mark Whitaker. Grainne made a point I hadn't picked up on: Pentagon officials raised no objections to the story for a week after it was published, until it was translated by Arab media outlets and led to the rioting. Maybe because they knew about the prisoners' testimony already on the record, and the articles in the Italian press and the Phila Inquirer. Or maybe they were busy eating lunch. Or maybe they didn't think it was all that different from the sexual degradation and menstrual blood trick and not letting Muslims cleanse themselves so they could pray, and other religious persecution. Maybe they had read this testimony: B. From the Center for Constitutional Rights, New York City, NY and linked as a footnote in a Human Rights Watch report: 72.They were never given prayer mats and initially they didn't get a Koran. When the Korans were provided, they were kicked and thrown about by the guards and on occasion thrown in the buckets used for the toilets. This kept happening. When it happened it was always said to be an accident but it was a recurrent theme. ... 74. Asif says that `it was impossible to pray because initially we did not know the direction to pray, but also given that we couldn't move and the harassment from the guards, it was simply not feasible. The behaviour of the guards towards our religious practices as well as the Koran was also, in my view, designed to cause us as much distress as possible. They would kick the Koran, throw it into the toilet and generally disrespect it..."'. I can see why the DOD people didn't pay much attention to the article that was submitted to them and the Pentagon didn't object to it, either, until riots about our behavior made them look bad and need to deflect attention from the testimony itself -- to change the subject. I'm sure that some dumb or ignorant people will now believe that the fact that it wasn't an internal military investigation (apparently) proves that the Quran wasn't tossed into buckets of feces and toilets. But then look how many believe that it was Iraq who bombed the WTC, and that WMD made it necessary for us to be in the war. The Bush administration is ruining this country and putting Americans at risk, possibly for decades, with its stupidity. Whose fault is that? Must be Newsweek's.