Alleged desecration of the Quran/Koran @ Guantanamo

[Last Rezort]

:thumbsup:

Originally posted by: piasabird
Too many fanatics and not enough ammo.

 

[fjord]

The stories of abuse are not new. That's what people are rioting about.

Don't Blame Newsweek
Despite sloppiness, Newsweek didn't fabricate Koran story

by Molly Ivins

As Riley used to say on an ancient television sitcom, "This is a revoltin' development." There seems to be a bit of a campaign on the right to blame Newsweek for the anti-American riots in Afghanistan, Pakistan and other Islamic countries.

Uh, people, I hate to tell you this, but the story about Americans abusing the Koran in order to enrage prisoners has been out there for quite some time. The first mention I found of it is March 17, 2004, when the Independent of London interviewed the first British citizen released from Guantanamo Bay. The prisoner said he had been physically beaten but did not consider that as bad as the psychological torture, which he described extensively. Jamal al-Harith, a computer programmer from Manchester, said 70 percent of the inmates had gone on a hunger strike after a guard kicked a copy of the Koran. The strike was ended by force-feeding.

Then came the report, widely covered in American media last December, by the International Red Cross concerning torture at Gitmo. I wrote at the time: "In the name of Jesus Christ Almighty, why are people representing our government, paid by us, writing filth on the Korans of helpless prisoners? Is this American? Is this Christian? What are our moral values? Where are the clergymen on this? Speak up, speak out."

The reports kept coming: Dec. 30, 2004, "Released Moroccan Guantanamo Detainee Tells Islamist Paper of His Ordeal," reported the Financial Times. "They watched you each time you went to the toilet; the American soldiers used to tear up copies of Koran and throw them in the toilet. ..." said the released prisoner.

On Jan. 9, 2005, Andrew Sullivan, writing in The Sunday Times of London, said: "We now know a great deal about what has gone on in U.S. detention facilities under the Bush administration. Several government and Red Cross reports detail the way many detainees have been treated. We know for certain that the United States has tortured five inmates to death. We know that 23 others have died in U.S. custody under suspicious circumstances. We know that torture has been practiced by almost every branch of the U.S. military in sites all over the world -- from Abu Ghraib to Tikrit, Mosul, Basra, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay.

"We know that no incidents of abuse have been reported in regular internment facilities and that hundreds have occurred in prisons geared to getting intelligence. We know that thousands of men, women and children were grabbed almost at random from their homes in Baghdad, taken to Saddam's former torture palace and subjected to abuse, murder, beatings, semi-crucifixions and rape.

"All of this is detailed in the official reports. What has been perpetrated in secret prisons to 'ghost detainees' hidden from Red Cross inspection, we do not know. We may never know.

"This is America? While White House lawyers were arguing about what separates torture from legitimate 'coercive interrogation techniques,' the following was taking place: Prisoners were hanged for hours or days from bars or doors in semi-crucifixions; they were repeatedly beaten unconscious, woken and then beaten again for days on end; they were sodomized; they were urinated on, kicked in the head, had their ribs broken, and were subjected to electric shocks.

"Some Muslims had pork or alcohol forced down their throats; they had tape placed over their mouths for reciting the Koran; many Muslims were forced to be naked in front of each other, members of the opposite sex and sometimes their own families. It was routine for the abuses to be photographed in order to threaten the showing of the humiliating footage to family members."

The New York Times reported on May 1 on the same investigation Newsweek was writing about and interviewed a released Kuwaiti, who spoke of three major hunger strikes, one of them touched off by "guards' handling copies of the Koran, which had been tossed into a pile and stomped on. A senior officer delivered an apology over the camp's loudspeaker system, pledging that such abuses would stop. Interpreters, standing outside each prison block, translated the officer's apology. A former interrogator at Guantanamo, in an interview with the Times, confirmed the accounts of the hunger strikes, including the public expression of regret over the treatment of the Korans."

So where does all this leave us? With a story that is not only true, but previously reported numerous times. So let's drop the "Lynch Newsweek" bull. Seventeen people have died in these riots. They didn't die because of anything Newsweek did -- the riots were caused by what our government has done.

Get your minds around it. Our country is guilty of torture. To quote myself once more: "What are you going to do about this? It's your country, your money, your government. You own this country, you run it, you are the board of directors. They are doing this in your name. The people we elected to public office do what you want them to. Perhaps you should get in touch with them."

 

[SuperTool]

I am sick of this administration desecrating Newsweek!

 

[conjur]

Signs of cojones in the press corps sighted!!!


http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/05/20050517-2.html

Q Scott, you said that the retraction by Newsweek magazine of its story is a good first step. What else does the President want this American magazine to do?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, it's what I talked about yesterday. This report, which Newsweek has now retracted and said was wrong, has had serious consequences. People did lose their lives. The image of the United States abroad has been damaged; there is lasting damage to our image because of this report. And we would encourage Newsweek to do all that they can to help repair the damage that has been done, particularly in the region.

And I think Newsweek can do that by talking about the way they got this wrong, and pointing out what the policies and practices of the United States military are when it comes to the handling of the Holy Koran. The military put in place policies and procedures to make sure that the Koran was handled -- or is handled with the utmost care and respect. And I think it would help to point that out, because some have taken this report -- those that are opposed to the United States -- some have taken this report and exploited it and used it to incite violence.

Q With respect, who made you the editor of Newsweek? Do you think it's appropriate for you, at that podium, speaking with the authority of the President of the United States, to tell an American magazine what they should print?

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm not telling them. I'm saying that we would encourage them to help --

Q You're pressuring them.

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I'm saying that we would encourage them --

Q It's not pressure?

MR. McCLELLAN: Look, this report caused serious damage to the image of the United States abroad. And Newsweek has said that they got it wrong. I think Newsweek recognizes the responsibility they have. We appreciate the step that they took by retracting the story. Now we would encourage them to move forward and do all that they can to help repair the damage that has been done by this report. And that's all I'm saying. But, no, you're absolutely right, it's not my position to get into telling people what they can and cannot report.

And, some others in the media are catching on:

http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/5409054.html
The Star Tribune, Minneapolis, in today?s editorial, tells media to ?Resist? White House pressure and efforts to shift blame for failing foriegn policy onto a news managzine. Kudos to one of the few remaining uncorrupted mainstream newspapers.

 

[conjur]

Red Cross told U.S. of Koran incidents
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nati...may19,1,278199.story?coll=chi-news-hed

WASHINGTON -- The International Committee of the Red Cross documented what it called credible information about U.S. personnel disrespecting or mishandling Korans at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility and pointed it out to the Pentagon in confidential reports during 2002 and early 2003, an ICRC spokesman said Wednesday.

Representatives of the ICRC, who have played a key role in investigating abuse allegations at the facility in Cuba and other U.S. military prisons, never witnessed such incidents firsthand during on-site visits, said Simon Schorno, an ICRC spokesman in Washington.

But ICRC delegates, who have been granted access to the secretive camp since January 2002, gathered and corroborated enough similar, independent reports from detainees to raise the issue multiple times with Guantanamo commanders and with Pentagon officials, Schorno said in an interview Wednesday.

Following the ICRC's reports, the Defense Department command in Guantanamo issued almost three pages of detailed, written guidelines for treatment of Korans. Schorno said ICRC representatives did not receive any other complaints or document similar incidents following the issuance of the guidelines on Jan. 19, 2003.

The issue of how Korans are handled by American personnel guarding Muslim detainees moved into the spotlight after protests in Muslim nations, including deadly riots in Afghanistan, that followed a now-retracted report in Newsweek magazine. That story said U.S. investigators had confirmed that interrogators had flushed a Koran down a toilet.

The Koran is Islam's holiest book, and mistreating it is seen as an offense against God.

Following the firestorm over the report and the riots, the ICRC declined Wednesday to discuss what kind of alleged incidents were involved, how many there were or how often it reported them to American officials prior to the release of the 2003 Koran guidelines.

"We don't want to comment specifically on specific instances of desecration, only on the general level of how the Koran was disrespected," Schorno said.

Schorno did say, however, that there were "multiple" instances involved and that the ICRC made confidential reports about such incidents "multiple" times to Guantanamo and Pentagon officials.

In addition to the retracted Newsweek story, senior Bush administration officials have repeatedly downplayed other reports regarding alleged abuses of the Koran at Guantanamo, largely dismissing them because they came from current or former detainees.

Pentagon confirms reports

Asked about the ICRC's confidential reports Wednesday night, Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, confirmed their existence but sought to downplay the seriousness of their content. He said they were forwarded "on rare occasions" and called them "detainee allegations which they [the ICRC] could not corroborate."

But that is not how Schorno, the ICRC spokesman, portrayed the reports.

"All information we received were corroborated allegations," he said, adding, "We certainly corroborated mentions of the events by detainees themselves."

`Not just one person'

Schorno also said: "Obviously, it is not just one person telling us something happened and we just fire up. We take it very seriously, and very carefully, and document everything in our confidential reports."

It was not clear whether the ICRC's corroboration went beyond statements made independently by detainees.

The organization has said that it insists on speaking "in total privacy to each and every detainee held" when its delegates and translators visit military detention facilities.

Still, Whitman said there was nothing in the ICRC reports that approximated the information published in the story retracted by Newsweek.

"The representations that were made to the United States military at Guantanamo by the ICRC are consistent with the types of things we have found in various [U.S. military] log entries about handling Korans, such as the accidental dropping of a Koran," he said.


continue >>

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Yes. This COULD NOT have been sloppy reporting and a fabrication by Newsweek. Instead there's this massive conspiracy of government influence on Newsweek. :roll:

Man the silly and desperate grasping of some people just never cease to amaze.

 

[conjur]

Nice to see TLC back in his ol' dismissive and apologetic form, constantly denying the many documented cases of abuse. Your transformation into a complete Freeper is almost complete. Soon, you'll be one of them, just as CsG has done.

Go right on apologizing and defending this corrupt band of thieves.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: conjur
Nice to see TLC back in his ol' dismissive and apologetic form, constantly denying the many documented cases of abuse. Your transformation into a complete Freeper is almost complete. Soon, you'll be one of them, just as CsG has done.

Go right on apologizing and defending this corrupt band of thieves.

Leave it up to conjur to take the word of reports coming from detainees while dismissing everything else that doesn't meet his world view of pointing a finger at the US gov. You don't have to transform into someone from the DU. You are the grand poobah of the Delerious Underground.

 

[conjur]

I'll take the word of the Red Cross who has corroborated the claims and the Pentagon has even confirmed them. I'm not a blind, naive Bush-God fanboi like yourself.


Or, perhaps you've forgotten all of this:
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=52&threadid=1305083&enterthread=y

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: conjur
I'll take the word of the Red Cross who has corroborated the claims and the Pentagon has even confirmed them. I'm not a blind, naive Bush-God fanboi like yourself.

No you're a blind, rabid Bush hater who is taking the word of one person, the IRCC spokesman, over the conflicting words of another and stating that one person's word as absolute fact. From your own link:

"Asked about the ICRC's confidential reports Wednesday night, Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, confirmed their existence but sought to downplay the seriousness of their content. He said they were forwarded "on rare occasions" and called them "detainee allegations which they [the ICRC] could not corroborate.""

 

[ExpertNovice]

Originally posted by: kami333
Try flushing down a couple copies of the Bible and see what kind of reaction you get.

And wasn't there a thing a while ago when some Torahs got desecrated?

Actually, in the United States we have had two "artists" get Government grants. In one the cross was placed into urine and in the other Jesus was being urinated on. Of course, there was the one where one man was urinating in anothers mouth that was also given a Government grant.

However, most Christians would pray for someone who desecrates the Holy Bible. The Bible does not tell the readers to go out and kill non-Christians. Indeed, it says Thou shall not kill. That is one fundamental philosophical difference between Christians and Muslims.

Of course, there can be a HUGE difference between what the religion teaches and how mankind preaches.

Both the Muslim and Christian faith consider homosexuality and pedophiles in contempt. However, in both religions such practices occur amongst those who claim to follow their religion.

God will be the ultimate judge.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur
I'll take the word of the Red Cross who has corroborated the claims and the Pentagon has even confirmed them. I'm not a blind, naive Bush-God fanboi like yourself.

No you're a blind, rabid Bush hater who is taking the word of one person, the IRCC spokesman, over the conflicting words of another and stating that one person's word as absolute fact. From your own link:

"Asked about the ICRC's confidential reports Wednesday night, Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, confirmed their existence but sought to downplay the seriousness of their content. He said they were forwarded "on rare occasions" and called them "detainee allegations which they [the ICRC] could not corroborate.""

And since when has the Pentagon been fully honest in anything?

Nice of you to leave off the rest, though:

But that is not how Schorno, the ICRC spokesman, portrayed the reports.

"All information we received were corroborated allegations," he said, adding, "We certainly corroborated mentions of the events by detainees themselves."

`Not just one person'

Schorno also said: "Obviously, it is not just one person telling us something happened and we just fire up. We take it very seriously, and very carefully, and document everything in our confidential reports."

And, again, I direct you to:
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=52&threadid=1305083&enterthread=y

And also the many other links to proof of other Quran desecration that have been provided in this thread.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur
I'll take the word of the Red Cross who has corroborated the claims and the Pentagon has even confirmed them. I'm not a blind, naive Bush-God fanboi like yourself.

No you're a blind, rabid Bush hater who is taking the word of one person, the IRCC spokesman, over the conflicting words of another and stating that one person's word as absolute fact. From your own link:

"Asked about the ICRC's confidential reports Wednesday night, Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, confirmed their existence but sought to downplay the seriousness of their content. He said they were forwarded "on rare occasions" and called them "detainee allegations which they [the ICRC] could not corroborate.""

And since when has the Pentagon been fully honest in anything?

When have they always been completely dishonest, so that nothing they say can possibly be true? Or shall we only believe them when conjur determines whether they are speaking the truth or speaking lies?

Nice of you to leave off the rest, though:

Well duh. There was a reason for that. I pointed out to you the portion of the article that is contrary to your assertion. It does help to keep things in context, something you seem to have a problem with quite frequently.

And also the many other links to proof of other Quran desecration that have been provided in this thread.

Feel free to link to those specifically.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur
And since when has the Pentagon been fully honest in anything?

When have they always been completely dishonest, so that nothing they say can possibly be true? Or shall we only believe them when conjur determines whether they are speaking the truth or speaking lies?

Another DUHversion, eh? Can't answer the question, eh?

Nice of you to leave off the rest, though:

Well duh. There was a reason for that. I pointed out to you the portion of the article that is contrary to your assertion. It does help to keep things in context, something you seem to have a problem with quite frequently.

Hmm...the portion I even had in bold when I posted it? You see, you put 100% faith in this government and 0% faith in outside agencies. I put about 50% faith in the government and about 75-80% faith in outside agencies (esp. those that don't have political agendas to fill.)

And also the many other links to proof of other Quran desecration that have been provided in this thread.

Feel free to link to those specifically.

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=52&threadid=1591427&enterthread=y

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: conjur
Can't answer the question, eh?

I already answered the question. Can't comprehend my answer, eh?

Hmm...the portion I even had in bold when I posted it? You see, you put 100% faith in this government and 0% faith in outside agencies. I put about 50% faith in the government and about 75-80% faith in outside agencies (esp. those that don't have political agendas to fill.)

No conjur. It's a matter of correct observation, one that seems to pass you by. You see, you don't appear to place any faith in the government whatsoever, as your posting record would easily attest to. Yet you claim otherwise.

Contrarily, I focus on those things concerning the government I beleve they are doing right. Exactly the opposite of you. Your mirror image. Polar opposite. The light-side to your dark-side implications that govenment is hell and full of devils. But there are plenty of things about the government I don't have faith in. And unlike you I do not trust outside agencies any more than the government.

So you make a really poor assumption in your statement.

And also the many other links to proof of other Quran desecration that have been provided in this thread.

Feel free to link to those specifically.

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=52&threadid=1591427&enterthread=y
[/quote]
The key word in your statement being "many other." You show me one link about the violence due to the now deflated Newsweek story? That doesn't come off as "many other" in my mind.

 

[conjur]

It's a link to this thread. Geez. Learn how to click and read. I've posted many other links in this thread. Go read them.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: conjur
It's a link to this thread. Geez. Learn how to click and read. I've posted many other links in this thread. Go read them.

I'm not going to wade through an entire thread and your attempt to overwhelm by providing a copious amount of links, implying sheer volume = truth. You claim there are "many other links" proving desecration of the Quran. Fine. Please link them specifically in here. It's not my job to chase after your claims, dude.

 

[conjur]

oooo...a whole 117 posts. Wow. That will take ALL DAY.



Stop being so damn arrogant and scroll up. I'm *not* repeating myself for you, troll.

 

[jbaggins]

Is this really surprising?

If they can strip a 16 yr old boy naked, and smear mud on him, make them form human pyramids naked, make them masturbate, make them believe they are touching the blood of a woman during a period, do you guys really think this was that much worse?

i agree though with the OP, really, it isn't worth killing over a book, anybook. But their reaction does not surprise me either. They [Muslims] have nothing else in life it seems, other than their religion.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: conjur
oooo...a whole 117 posts. Wow. That will take ALL DAY.



Stop being so damn arrogant and scroll up. I'm *not* repeating myself for you, troll.

Come on Conjur. You're not being fair. You know Bush and his flock have trouble reading. It's hard work, and they might encounter unpleasant facts that challenge their faith. Best to let Rush and his kind spoon feed them all the (dis)information they need.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: conjur
oooo...a whole 117 posts. Wow. That will take ALL DAY.



Stop being so damn arrogant and scroll up. I'm *not* repeating myself for you, troll.

You make the claim. You back it up pal. I'm not doing your legwork for you.

I've seen no links validating your claim so right now I'll just have to assume you are posaturing and FOS because you can't actually back up your lame BS.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: conjur
oooo...a whole 117 posts. Wow. That will take ALL DAY.



Stop being so damn arrogant and scroll up. I'm *not* repeating myself for you, troll.

Come on Conjur. You're not being fair. You know Bush and his flock have trouble reading. It's hard work, and they might encounter unpleasant facts that challenge their faith. Best to let Rush and his kind spoon feed them all the (dis)information they need.

Do you have anything useful at all to add to this discussion besides juvenile drivel such as you've posted above?

Apparently you don't.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur
oooo...a whole 117 posts. Wow. That will take ALL DAY.



Stop being so damn arrogant and scroll up. I'm *not* repeating myself for you, troll.

You make the claim. You back it up pal. I'm not doing your legwork for you.

I've seen no links validating your claim so right now I'll just have to assume you are posaturing and FOS because you can't actually back up your lame BS.

Read.

The.

Thread.

I've already done the legwork. You just have to read it.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur
oooo...a whole 117 posts. Wow. That will take ALL DAY.



Stop being so damn arrogant and scroll up. I'm *not* repeating myself for you, troll.

You make the claim. You back it up pal. I'm not doing your legwork for you.

I've seen no links validating your claim so right now I'll just have to assume you are posaturing and FOS because you can't actually back up your lame BS.

Read.

The.

Thread.

I've already done the legwork. You just have to read it.

POST

THE

RELEVANT

LINKS

I'm not wading through another thread to find what you should be providing in this one.

 

[conjur]

Already.

Posted.

IN THIS THREAD!


Read.

The.

Thread.




/end of thread