Newsweek to the US.

[BBond]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: BBond
Does that fact that this information was obtained from a senior administration official bother anyone other than me?

Not if we got a name of the person.

Without a name it can be anybody including myself.

Why not let Fitzgerald investigate this too? Maybe he can come up with the same results he gave us in the Plame case.

Nothing.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: BBond
Does that fact that this information was obtained from a senior administration official bother anyone other than me?

Not if we got a name of the person.

Without a name it can be anybody including myself.

Why not let Fitzgerald investigate this too? Maybe he can come up with the same results he gave us in the Plame case.

Nothing.

You are going off on a tangent.

 

[Last Rezort]

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: Rogue
I should tell everyone here, having spoken with at least a dozen Military Police who served at Gitmo, that the prisoners themselves would regularly take their very own Koran and stuff it in their toilet to cause the system to backup and otherwise cause problems in the camp. One such incident recounted to me by a couple of MPs I know stemmed from the removal of M&Ms, yes, the candy coated chocolates, from their MRE (meals ready to eat) and a subsequent complaint to the staff at the camp. I trust every word that these guys say about this, because unlike all of the conjecture and heresay going around in this thread, I have interviewed actual people and heard another side of the story that will likely never make it into the mainstream media. In any case, I am not discounting the claims brought forth by the article or anyone else, however, it appears to me based on several discussions with various other MPs that the prisoners themselves are just as guilty of the crime they are up in arms about. For all we know, they are clearing their own name by blaming their actions on their captors so as not to bring punishment upon themselves for their indiscretions while in captivity.

Rogue,

You're complaining about conjecture and hearsay with conjecture and hearsay.

I could do the same. I could say that i have family in a US sanctioned and trained hit sqaud that im not supposed to know about. They tell me things about how they get information, and it has nothing to do with ASKING question. I could tell you about what to do when they find the Iraqi's still fighting. Of course it doesn not matter, because i have no proof.
President bush told ME that he doesnt like swiss cheese.
See, i can do it too.

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: BBond
Does that fact that this information was obtained from a senior administration official bother anyone other than me?

Not if we got a name of the person.

Without a name it can be anybody including myself.

Why not let Fitzgerald investigate this too? Maybe he can come up with the same results he gave us in the Plame case.

Nothing.

You are going off on a tangent.

You are refusing to address the issue of this administration repeatedly supplying erroneous information to the press as well as their failure to hold administration members responsible for their actions.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Survey Says

And Clarification

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: BBond
Does that fact that this information was obtained from a senior administration official bother anyone other than me?

Not if we got a name of the person.

Without a name it can be anybody including myself.

Why not let Fitzgerald investigate this too? Maybe he can come up with the same results he gave us in the Plame case.

Nothing.

You are going off on a tangent.

You are refusing to address the issue of this administration repeatedly supplying erroneous information to the press as well as their failure to hold administration members responsible for their actions.

You are basing this on an anon source and looking foolish doing it.
You havent proved at all who the source is and if they are even in the administration.

All we have is an anon source who supposedly is in the administration being quoted in a story that has a follow up that will apparently make light of things that are incorrect in the original story.

Your argument is paper thin on this one.

 

[Rogue]

Look, apparently I need to clarify my statement for some people here who are hell bent on believing what they want to believe irregardless of other viewpoints.

I NEVER discredited the article, in fact I stated it could very well be true. I did, however, present another viewpoint in the matter supported by a few details that are hard to fabricate (the M&Ms) and can at least lend some degree of credibility to the statements I heard. I mean, c'mon, who is going to come way out of left field to include a minute detail like M&Ms if there weren't some degree of truth to the overall story.

Anyway, yes, what I am recounting to you is in fact heresay, however, it is NOT this behind closed doors, ultra-secret "administration official" BS that seems to be thrown around a lot in the media for stories they publish that cause a lot of strife in the world. Some of these guys first names are Christopher, Ryan, Kevin and Chad. I won't release their last names because I don't know if they'd want me to.

Again, I never expected 100% belief in my statements, however, I do hope that someone with some type of reason and common sense can see that there were in fact other circumstances involved here at Gitmo that could affect this story. For all we know the statement that Newsweek got referred to the prisoners themselves acting as I stated and somehow the information was mis-stated or otherwise incorrect in how it was related. It's going to be hard in any case to prove any of this short of a hard, confirmed report coming out with names, dates and times from official channels somehow. Until then, as I stated in my original post, ALL OF THIS is heresay and conjecture, including my own additions to the discussion. As evidenced time and again here in this forum though, people will believe what they want to believe irregardless of any other source of possibility.

 

[Last Rezort]

Originally posted by: TheGameIs21

Originally posted by: Last Rezort
anti-administration?
have your eyes been closed the last few years?
At least now we are starting to hear both sides.
Are you saying we sould have a media that hides facts from the public, that its ok to lie to the people in the peoples intrest?

All i have to say about bad facts is: "There are WMDs in Iraq"

Care to stick with the topic at hand or do you want to say that since the admin might have lied, newsweek can lie too?

there you go

 

[dmcowen674]

OP needs to update thread Title.

Bush wants a retraction by Newsweek for lying.

Newsweek should only agree when Bush gives a retraction for Lying about WMD in Iraq.

 

[daniel49]

Its Dan Rather all over again. unfortunately the preset agenda is make Bush look bad to the max and don't worry about the actual facts...they do a great disservice to many by thier irresponsable journalistic approach to reporting.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
OP needs to update thread Title.

Bush wants a retraction by Newsweek for lying.

Newsweek should only agree when Bush gives a retraction for Lying about WMD in Iraq.

Newsweek just caved under pressure form W and issued a retraction. Wusses

Guess they stood to lose money from Politcal base so they had no choice.

 

[SuperTool]

Nice to see Republicans and Democrats coming together in This Photo.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Nice to see Republicans and Democrats coming together in This Photo.

wtf...


Could that photochop be any more obvious?

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Nice to see Republicans and Democrats coming together in This Photo.

wtf...


Could that photochop be any more obvious?

It's from CNN front page.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Nice to see Republicans and Democrats coming together in This Photo.

wtf...
Could that photochop be any more obvious?

It's from CNN front page.

Caption says "Muslims in India get their message across."

I say screw them. Pitiful wusses

 

[tommywishbone]

Now let's see... We beat, torture, rape and kill our military prisoners but we didn't tear up the Koran? Give me a break. You know, absolutely know, that some prison guard tough guys, ripped up the book and flushed it. That's exactly the type of thing prison guards do. Newsweek "retraction" is total BS. The Man has them scared to death and they are trying to kiss azz.

 

[BBond]

Chris Matthews and the people he had on his show tonight, including David Gergen, were all of the opinion that Newsweek should out the source of this story. Gergen even said that was the way it used to be done. If an anonymous source screwed you on a bad story you outed the source and let them take the heat.

And they asked the very same question I've asked here. Why would a senior administration official leak a story like this with the obvious pitfalls and dangers?

Out the source and let him answer a few questions. This is just getting ridiculous. Our "free press" is being duped so often by this administration and is so inept in handling it they're beginning to appear complicit.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: BBond
Chris Matthews and the people he had on his show tonight, including David Gergen, were all of the opinion that Newsweek should out the source of this story. Gergen even said that was the way it used to be done. If an anonymous source screwed you on a bad story you outed the source and let them take the heat.

And they asked the very same question I've asked here. Why would a senior administration official leak a story like this with the obvious pitfalls and dangers?

Out the source and let him answer a few questions. This is just getting ridiculous. Our "free press" is being duped so often by this administration and is so inept in handling it they're beginning to appear complicit.

I disagree. Unless there is reason to believe this guy intentionally deceived Newsweek, they should protect him at all costs. There aren't that many true American patriots in the Pentagon, people who remember they are accountable to the citizens of America, and are willing to bring forth unflattering information.

 

[conjur]

And for the White House to rail against Newsweek when Afghani officials, themselves, say the riots were not over Newsweek's article but, rather, developments in Afghanistan is just pure, unadulterated hypocrisy.

An example:

http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=892

Today, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan lectured the media about a ?journalistic standard that should be met? before running with a story. Fine, but isn?t there also a political standard of accountability that should be met as well? McClellan?s issue with the Newsweek story was that it was ?based on a single anonymous source who cannot personally substantiate the report.?

Remember when we learned that the evidence for Iraq?s supposed mobile biological weapons labs came from an unreliable source? What was McClellan?s response then?

QUESTION: Does it concern the President that the primary source for the intelligence on the mobile biological weapons labs was a guy that U.S. intelligence never every interviewed?

MCCLELLAN: Well, again, all these issues will be looked at as part of a broad review by the independent commission that the President appointed? But it?s important that we look at what we learn on the ground and compare that with what we believed prior to going into Iraq.

[White House Press Gaggle, 4/5/04]

 

[Rogue]

At last! Vindication. Read this article with the latest information from the investigation and tell me again that what I related from people who were there wasn't true.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7937016/site/newsweek/

The excerpt in question is the 4th paragraph in the article and describes almost exactly what my friends told me happened down there. Here's the paragraph:

"According to Di Rita, when the first prisons were built for suspected terrorists at Guantanamo in early 2002, prison guards were instructed to respect the detainees' religious rituals. The prisoners were given Qur'ans, which they hung from the walls of their cells in cotton surgical masks provided by the prison. Log entries by the guards indicate that in about a dozen cases, the detainees themselves somehow damaged their Qur'ans. In one case a prisoner allegedly ripped up a Qur'an; in another a prisoner tore the cover off his Qur'an. In three cases, detainees tried to stuff pages from their Qur'ans down their toilets, according to the Defense Department's account of what is in the guards' reports. (NEWSWEEK was not permitted to see the log items.) The log entries do not indicate why the detainees might have done this, said Di Rita, and prison commanders concluded that certain hard-core prisoners would try to agitate the other detainees by alleging disrespect for Muslim articles of faith."

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: Rogue
At last! Vindication. Read this article with the latest information from the investigation and tell me again that what I related from people who were there wasn't true.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7937016/site/newsweek/

The excerpt in question is the 4th paragraph in the article and describes almost exactly what my friends told me happened down there. Here's the paragraph:

"According to Di Rita, when the first prisons were built for suspected terrorists at Guantanamo in early 2002, prison guards were instructed to respect the detainees' religious rituals. The prisoners were given Qur'ans, which they hung from the walls of their cells in cotton surgical masks provided by the prison. Log entries by the guards indicate that in about a dozen cases, the detainees themselves somehow damaged their Qur'ans. In one case a prisoner allegedly ripped up a Qur'an; in another a prisoner tore the cover off his Qur'an. In three cases, detainees tried to stuff pages from their Qur'ans down their toilets, according to the Defense Department's account of what is in the guards' reports. (NEWSWEEK was not permitted to see the log items.) The log entries do not indicate why the detainees might have done this, said Di Rita, and prison commanders concluded that certain hard-core prisoners would try to agitate the other detainees by alleging disrespect for Muslim articles of faith."

Di Rita :roll:

 

[Rogue]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: Rogue
At last! Vindication. Read this article with the latest information from the investigation and tell me again that what I related from people who were there wasn't true.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7937016/site/newsweek/

The excerpt in question is the 4th paragraph in the article and describes almost exactly what my friends told me happened down there. Here's the paragraph:

"According to Di Rita, when the first prisons were built for suspected terrorists at Guantanamo in early 2002, prison guards were instructed to respect the detainees' religious rituals. The prisoners were given Qur'ans, which they hung from the walls of their cells in cotton surgical masks provided by the prison. Log entries by the guards indicate that in about a dozen cases, the detainees themselves somehow damaged their Qur'ans. In one case a prisoner allegedly ripped up a Qur'an; in another a prisoner tore the cover off his Qur'an. In three cases, detainees tried to stuff pages from their Qur'ans down their toilets, according to the Defense Department's account of what is in the guards' reports. (NEWSWEEK was not permitted to see the log items.) The log entries do not indicate why the detainees might have done this, said Di Rita, and prison commanders concluded that certain hard-core prisoners would try to agitate the other detainees by alleging disrespect for Muslim articles of faith."

Di Rita :roll:

Darkhawk28 :roll:

Care to add something to the conversation or do you not have anything to say of substance. I'm guessing the latter...

 

[conjur]

Why don't you do the same, Rogue? Posting a quote from Di Rita is like posting a quote from ScottyBoy or Sean Hannity. It ain't gonna have an ounce of truth in it.

 

[Rogue]

Originally posted by: conjur
Why don't you do the same, Rogue? Posting a quote from Di Rita is like posting a quote from ScottyBoy or Sean Hannity. It ain't gonna have an ounce of truth in it.

AAAHHHH! JESUS CHRIST PEOPLE! I posted my story earlier in the thread. A report comes out that verifies almost exactly what I was told by several people who were actually there. What are the chances of all of them lying and this DiRita person telling the same exact lie having never met them? What are the fvcking chances of that? More proof that there is nothing that anyone can prove to someone who has their mind made up before hand. You people are thick.

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: Rogue

Originally posted by: conjur
Why don't you do the same, Rogue? Posting a quote from Di Rita is like posting a quote from ScottyBoy or Sean Hannity. It ain't gonna have an ounce of truth in it.

AAAHHHH! JESUS CHRIST PEOPLE! I posted my story earlier in the thread. A report comes out that verifies almost exactly what I was told by several people who were actually there. What are the chances of all of them lying and this DiRita person telling the same exact lie having never met them? What are the fvcking chances of that? More proof that there is nothing that anyone can prove to someone who has their mind made up before hand. You people are thick.

Thanks pot.

Did you hear that kettle???