Skip to comments.Newsweek apologizes for getting Koran-Guantanamo Bay story wrong. (The Editor's Desk)
Posted on 05/15/2005 10:31:22 AM PDT by Pikamax
click here to read article
NewsReek knew exactly what those lunatic Muslims would do after reading their little article. Newsreek is responsible for everything that happened.
I used to know a guy so ticklish that if he was standing in front of some one talking and someone goosed him, he would commence to beat h*ll out of whoever he was talking to. And many their were who sought an opportunity to pull this stunt on him and his unsuspecting conversee.
For every action there is a reaction-Newsreek knew exactly what the reaction to it's action would be. It was with sinister intent that this liberal bird cage liner publisher, printed this lethal lie.
And once the World Court has tried, convicted and strung up...........er....sentenced Newsreek-the World Court must be made as extinct as the dodo bird.
Thanks so much for providing the details & those links.
Apparently I must have heard it from Gen. Meyers when FNC showed a clip.....and not from Tony Snow.
Does the name Abu Ghraib sound familiar. The only difference that "truth" would make is that the journalists could justify themselves by claiming, "Only doing our job." In this case, they can't even make that sorry excuse.
Thanks for the ping!
Even if they can justify printing a story, it doesn't mean they should.
So if the story were true and Newsweek reported it (thereby resulting in the same number of deaths) this would be a non-issue with you. Which answers my question.
So: if people die in a stampede when someone yells "fire", it is a tragedy regardless of whether there actually was a fire or not.Dead folks are just as dead no matter how they got that way. But if someone incites a stampede on false premises, and people die, the people advancing the bogus alarm need to be held accountable.Yes the rioters need to be held accountable, but the folks stoking the violence do as well. Dan Rather never got anybody offed. Isikoff did. Post/Newsweek has deep pockets, and I understand there are ambulance chasers here already lining up colleagues over there to troll for clients. No joke.
If what you are asking is would I be outraged if the story were true, I wouldn't be outraged at Michael Isikoff (again, a guy I used to have some respect for). I'd be outraged at the idiots in the US military who handed such prime propaganda on a silver platter over to the enemy, and I'd be outraged at the irrational muslims who use their religion as an excuse to commit gravely evil acts who did the actual killing. But since Newsweek has admitted that they didn't have any professionally responsible basis to print the charge, and pretty much breached every journalistic ethic in the book in order to do it, I (and others here) are just saying that Isikoff deserves whatever our good friends over at the American Trial Lawyers Association are currently planning for him. Heck, I like the guy, but Isikoff wouldn't want me in that jury box. Even I'd say: REAM him!
I would be. The story, true or not, should never have been published.
On the "Atrocity" meter, the needle barely moves. But on the "Potential Harm To Innocents Abroad" meter, it's off the scale.
(I understand your logic)
You think this is just like all those Hollywood celebs who have a home made porno accidentally get out into the public as their career is fading or which brings them to stardom (Pamela Lee, Paris Hilton, etc). Oh no, how did that accidentally leak into the media?, as their face and name is all over TV, the tabloids and radio.
But how can Newsweek possibly profit from this? This will kill their reputation as a credible source for news. Look at CBS and their credibility and polls after the Rather ordeal. This ought to hurt Newsweek not benefit them twice since the readers buy this magazine to get what they believe to be accurate news.
I formally issue a "fatwah" on Newsweek and staff..
The Newsweek editors should get their heads flushed down the toilet..
Ever notice how their "journalism" only gets this shoddy when they are casting George Bush, Bible-based Christians, the military or America in a bad light? The rest of the time, they seem to understand that charges must be substantiated, documented and sourced. Funny how they "forget" that so predictably, so selectively.