Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

From the Right-Weak news
The Barnstable Patriot ^ | May 28, 2005 | Steve Tefft

Posted on 05/28/2005 7:54:13 PM PDT by quidnunc

Some questions, answers and general observations about the recent flap involving Newsweek magazine and the infamous, flushing-the-Koran allegation:

1) Was Newsweek wrong to print the story? Yes. Apart from the ideological ramifications of the incident (more on those later), publishing the story was simply bad journalism. The magazine claimed it had sources for the allegation. Sources (plural) turned out to be “source”(singular), which turned out to be someone who thought he heard proof of the allegation. That’s hardly a strong base upon which to build a case for running such a potentially explosive accusation. Writers generally learn about this in Journalism 101.

2) If the story had solid proof behind it, should Newsweek have run it? Yes, but in proper context. If the magazine had irrefutable proof of American interrogators flushing a Koran down a toilet, it would have had every right to print it … but it also would have had the responsibility to frame the technique within the larger picture of the military’s constant search for vital information. In other words, why was it done. We’re not trying to find out where terrorists may have hid the bathroom key; we’re looking for info that can save American lives. That type of information is not likely to come forth from detainees who are pampered. It’s the “ticking time bomb” question: if a detainee knows where and when a time bomb will go off, should all means of information extraction be used on him? Absolutely.

-snip-

(Excerpt) Read more at barnstablepatriot.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: korandesecration; newsweek

1 posted on 05/28/2005 7:54:13 PM PDT by quidnunc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

'Sources (plural) turned out to be “source”(singular), which turned out to be someone who thought he heard proof of the allegation. That’s hardly a strong base upon which to build a case for running such a potentially explosive accusation. Writers generally learn about this in Journalism 101.'

...Either Mike was a) asleep during this particular lesson, or b) decided to cut class.

-Regards, T.


2 posted on 05/28/2005 8:03:33 PM PDT by T Lady (G.W. Bush to Kerry & the MSM: "I've come to settle the Family Business.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

There is more evidence that Bill Clinton raped three women than the koran was somehow messed with!


3 posted on 05/28/2005 8:22:43 PM PDT by lawdude (Liberalism is a mental disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

A short article in the Wall Street Journal indicated that Newsweek hasn't extended its "mea culpa" coverage to its Arabic language edition.


4 posted on 05/28/2005 8:30:41 PM PDT by ntnychik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
It’s the “ticking time bomb” question: if a detainee knows where and when a time bomb will go off, should all means of information extraction be used on him? Absolutely.

Put a man's testicles in a vise and there's nothing he won't tell you... eventually.

5 posted on 05/28/2005 9:24:03 PM PDT by thoughtomator (The U.S. Constitution poses no serious threat to our form of government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lawdude
When the federal government pays for a crucifix to be submerged in a jar of urine and publicly displayed in offense to many Christians, it is "free speech".

When agents of the federal government are accused by international terrorists of putting part or all of a koran into a toilet (possibly dunking it or flushing it) and word gets back to Pakistan by hearsay as transmitted in a national magazine, it is an example of "hate speech".
6 posted on 05/29/2005 12:44:50 AM PDT by weegee ("Do you want them to write a piece about how great the military is?" Elizabeth Bumiller - NY Times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson