It appears I have created a shit-storm with this post.
Good- We need to deal with what is going in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Gitmo and we need to act like responsible adults and fix problems where we see them.
Bad- It appears only lefties agree with me, which is not troubling to me because I mind siding with Democrats and Progressives when they are right, but because I find the continued silence by many on my side of the aisle to be troubling. I am as partisan as they come, and I hate being used as a club against my own party, but I am not going to wallow in hubris just because some in my party choose to do so.
Let’s deal with some specific nonsense that has arisen:
1.) This is all about Hugh Hewitt– Nonsense. My personal opinions of Hugh Hewitt, the person, are irrelevant. In the past, I have kindly linked to Hugh when I thought he was right, and I have had unkind things to say when I thought he was wrong. I am sure he is charming, pleasant, and his family and friends love him, but it just so happens that I think he is wrong, dead wrong, on this issue, and his rhetoric is not only demagogic but dangerous, and simply a decent example of what my side is trying to peddle. Enough, already.
2.) We should expect there to be incidences of torture, because this just happens in war– This may be one of the dumber sentiments expressed, and it seems to be used as a defense for what is currently going on. Of course there have always been violations of international law, abuses, and inhumane crimes during times of war. I naturally assume that most of my readers on both sides of the aisle are aware of these things, and I apologize for holding you in higher regard than I should have.
I assumed that people have heard of Lt. Calley and My Lai. I assumed that people were aware of the summary executions of Germans after the Battle of the Bulge. I assume people know history and have heard of the atrocities at Andersonville during the Civil War. That war is nasty and that there will be war crimes seems to be inevitable, and, in this debate, an utterly irrelevant point of order.
The only reason the history of atrocities is mentioned in this debate is to deflect attention from what is currently going on, in an attempt to somehow excuse the outrageous “pulpifying” of innocent victims.
As for me, you can peddle that hogwash elsewhere. The time for a debate about the inevitability of abuse in a time of war is something that should be factored into the discussion about whether or not we should go to war. Not, as some would now have you believe, as a post hoc excuse for ongoing torture, and not, as some would like to pretend, as a sign of media restraint during World War II. I’ve gone through my own archives, and I don’t recall ever slowing down my pro-war rhetoric because I was concerned about abuses- I knew abuses would happen, but I hoped it wouldn’t.
I just didn’t think the abuses would take the form of systematic torture and that it would be this widespread, that people on my side of the aisle would tacitly condone torture, and I thought we would prosecute it.
I was wrong. The torture appears to be more widespread than I thought, my party thinks all you have to do is say ‘We don’t condone torture” and everything is taken care of, and the only people being prosecuted with any great effect are the reporters who had the temerity to cover the issue.
In other words, I was REALLY WRONG.
Personally, I think the only decent and responsible position is to deal with these abuses now, rather than just throwing my hands up in the air and wailing, “Such is war!”
3.) The media was more restrained in previous wars like World War II– Maybe, but in WWII, there was a pretty widespread consensus that the war was approriate and just. While I feel that way about the Iraq War, many do not. Regardless, with the global media and the internet, this is completely irrelevant, especially if you factor in the utter speciousness of the claim that reporting on torture and abuse somehow damages operational security.
Only if the operation you wish to undertake is continued torture. Otherwise, this ‘media restraint’ argument is, in a word, absurd.
4.) “Newsweek Lied, People Died!”– While the Newsweek story may have helped to agitate the riots, it is important to remember several things. First, who pulled the trigger.
The answer is, of course, the Afghan Police, as Greg Palast pointed out. Here is another report on who did what:
Four people are reported dead and 47 injured after the police opened fire on the protest, sparked by the report in Newsweek magazine that US personnel had flushed a copy of the Islamic holy book “down the toilet” at the detention centre in Cuba.
Next, who was shot? Well, most likely, the people who were killed in the riots were extremists who most of us generally would not lose sleep over were they killed. My new left-wing friends may lose sleep over my position, but I don’t necessarily lose a lot of sleep if Talibanesque Islamist fundamentalists are killed in protests- it just doesn’t move me to tears.
But since we are keeping score here, when an innocent cab driver is dragged from his car and systematically and methodically beaten to death for the sheer sadistic pleasure of it, to Hugh and others it is not news. When several people who are most likely Mullah Omar wannabees are gunned down while participating in rabid anti-American riots, we throw the outrage and rhetoric into high gear.
Spare me. I don’t have the requisite ability to ignore my cognitive dissonance to pull this one off.
5.) The Newsweek story was wrong– Maybe technically, but you have to wonder why it resonates so well among the communities in question. Could it be that the hundreds of documented reports of actual use of the Koran and Islamic symbols to bait prisoners resonates in these communities? And as far as I can tell, the source for this story has not denied that the Koran was flushed, but admitted only that he can not find the report in which it was detailed. If I am wrong about this, please correct me.
6.) Michael Isikoff is a left-wing hack– This is just an example of how quickly my fellow persecuted right-wingers make our enemies lists. Let me say just one thing in defense of Michael Isikoff’s alleged left-wing bias: Blow Job.
That is it for now. I am sure more bullshit will surface, and by all means, if you feel the need to offer up your own offal, feel free to do so. This is like playing t-ball with stupidity for me.
SDN
So Wretchard’s just a torture tool too?
http://belmontclub.blogspot.com/2005/05/high-hand-glenn-reynolds-notes-that.html
” He calls it “circling the wagons”, the idea being to teach press critics an object lesson in how expensive it is to humiliate the mass media by catching them at sloppy reporting by flooding the zone with stories similar to the one which was discredited . That may or may not be the case, but it is nearly undeniable that the effect of the media’s coverage of American misdeeds has been to make the slightest infraction against enemy combatants ruinously expensive. Not only the treatment of the enemy combatants themselves, but their articles of religious worship have become the subject of such scrutiny that Korans must handled with actual gloves in a ceremonial fashion, a fact that must be triumph for the jihadi cause in and of itself. While nothing is wrong with ensuring the proper treatment of enemy prisoners, the implicit moral superiority that has been accorded America’s enemy and his effects recalls Rudyard Kipling’s The Grave of the Hundred Dead.”
John Cole
That may or may not be the case, but it is nearly undeniable that the effect of the media’s coverage of American misdeeds has been to make the slightest infraction against enemy combatants ruinously expensive.
So clearly, the appropriate course of action is to kill the media, rather than stopping the American misdeeds.
Gotcha.
JonBuck
Well said, on both posts. And for the record, I’m Libertarian.
ppgaz
Hear, hear. On both posts. Well reasoned and well said.
SDN
Hey, we can always avoid prisoner abuse by refusing to take any. See Pacific Theater, WWII
John Cole
I believe they refused to surrender, not that we refused to take prisoners.
Halffasthero
John,the definition of “fair and balanced” as IT SHOULD BE, is in your blog and this post. I was reading the posts and enjoying the exchanges. There is a fine line between protecting the “National Interest” while delivering news and knowing when to expose truths NOT in the “National Interest.”
Did we create enemies with the Newsweek release or did we do it when we allowed the abuse? We show far more integrity when we are willing to clean our house then when we try to cover it up with the excuse that we are fighting “terrorists” therefore whatever we do is right. Walking the moral high ground comes at a cost. The first of which is that we measure ourselves by a higher standard and not the “everyone else does it” standard. By living by the latter standard, we make ourselves no better than the terrorists we are fighting with them in the same mud puddle they do. The only difference is, to borrow an old clich
Stormy70
John – do you consider flushing a Koran torture?
John Cole
OF course not, which is why using the Newsweek charade to attack media reports of actual torture is so absurd.
Stormy70
Thank you for clarifying. I think any and all true stories of torture should be reported. But I have no sympathy for the biased media, they deserve this backlash. Newsweek was wrong for reporting unsubstantiated claims.
ppgaz
AGain, dead wrong, Stormy.
Bias in media is not only okay, it’s desirable. However, the right likes to conflate bias with inaccuracy.
Accurate reporting of straighforward facts is not biased. It’s either right, or it’s wrong. Period.
Bias comes into play in choice of stories, viewpoint in prose, position in commentary. It is essential not only to have bias in media, it is also essential to have that bias be upfront and honest.
With accurate reports of facts, and exposed and honest bias in story choices and commentary, consumers of the media are empowered, and free, to get various viewpoints and make their own judgements.
What sucks is sloppy factual reporting, and coy or dishonest bias. I’d have no problem with Faux News, for example, if they just billboarded their bias. And of course, if the quality of their work was better.
There is no such thing as unbiased reporting. All human beings are biased. The right thing to do is to stick to good factual reporting when reporting facts, and declare biases when commenting on them.
It’s what all of us are supposed to do all the time. It’s simple, and it’s easy. It just takes a little honesty.
rudy
How do you expect anyone in a huge organization, when presented with a reporter’s story about a member of that organization that they do not have any immediate way of knowing about, to be in a position to deny anything without a lot of fact checking?
You couldn’t even do that about something your kid is said to have done without a lot of checking.
And if denied based on what he knew about it, and if the story later proves true, you can bet the headlines from the MSM would be “Pentagon Official Lied! …”
So, halffasthero, if you were the one the story had been shown to, what could YOU have said, right then, to fully deny it?
whisper
And then there is that whole little thing with the balance of evidence supporting most of the Newseek article’s claims. Of course, you’ve only got the word of a bunch of former intelligence officers, civilians, and those filthy commies in the Red Cross. But, still — hard to believe that a one-page Newsweek article’s what pushed the radically anti-American protesters over the edge, eh?
Mr.Ortiz
I don’t have the requisite cognitive dissonance to pull this one off.
I feel silly making a semantic correction in the middle of a flame war, but I can’t help myself. You DO have cognitive dissonance if you can see the hypocrisy in the example you provided. Perhaps more accurately, you have a lower tolerance for cognitive dissonance than the people you’re railing against.
halffasthero
“So, halffasthero, if you were the one the story had been shown to, what could YOU have said, right then, to fully deny it?”
Were they given the opportunity to, yes or no? Are they responsible for addressing press articles presented to them prior to release, yes or no? The answer to the first one is obvious, so what is your answer to the second?
Where do you intend the press to draw the line of confirmation? After all, that is what it comes down to. You are holding the press accuontable but you do not seem to hold the government so. Is a double standard fair?
Gold Star for Robot Boy
John, I agree – and I’m a Goldwater Republican.
norbizness
The LA Times rounded up all of the reports concerning the subject matter of the Newsweek blurb, which means that Isikoff is a sloppy hack but the story has been out there for 2 years.
Also, a number of reports have a Washington Times cartoon (with Pakistan depicted as a dog) really stirring up the populace, which still has very conservative, pro-Pakistan, but I-guess-non-terrorist elements. That goes more into Pakistan’s role in creating the Taliban, but that’s not important right now.
But great writing and good research, if my trackback hadn’t already confirmed by appreciation.
syn
How many stories has Isikoff presented regarding tortured US soldiers, from this war and from Gulf War I?
How many stories about enemies who hack off the heads of their prisoners?
How many stories about Saddam’s torture tactics?
Shawn
John, thank you for another terrific post. I read your blog every day, just to reassure myself that the whole Republican party hasn’t gone insane.
O/T, but I’m very frustrated by some of the posts above. I’ve been a registered Independent all my life. I’ve always agreed with the Democrats on some issues and the Republicans on others, never quite fit into either party. Honestly, until late last year I never even paid that much attention to politics. The Republican Party has made me, and many other Independents like me, sit up and pay attention recently.
They are condoning torture. They are threatening our country’s future with their deficits. They are threatening our civil rights with their Patriot Act. Hell, Tom Delay said we only have the right to privacy because of some activist judge. They’re not just after Roe vs. Wade. These assholes are even gunning for Griswald vs. Connecticut.
I value my civil rights. I value my privacy. I don’t want my son to live in a third world country because these Republicans are spending like drunken sailors to the tune of $2bn/day. Until people like you take back control of your party I will never vote for another Republican.
Republican apologists, take note. Eight months ago I didn’t give a shit about politics and had never donated time or money. Your party has given me and many others just like me reason and motivation to donate money and time to the Democrats. Wanna keep making excuses for your party? Enjoy the next fifty years as the minority party.
If you truly believe in the principles of the Republican Party, pay attention to John. Independents, the swing voters, are turning away from the Republicans. The Republican Party has gone astray.
TJ Jackson
Good to hear that the lives of American servicemen and American foreign policy can be subordinated to whether one feels a “war is just.” Hmm, I suppose this will carry great weight with the men in the field and the widows and orphans.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend. The Jihaddies never had such wonderful friends as the American media. Would any other nations media act this way in wartime and not earn the complete distain of the public?
Far North
You tell ’em TJ Jackson. Torture isn’t a problem. No siree, the media is the problem. The media is the enemy.
Let’s see here, US soldiers torture detainees to death. Media reports US soldieres tortured detainees to death. The media is pro-terrorist. The media is the problem. The media is the enemy.
How ’bout this TJ? We do all we can to stop the torture. We demand accountability of those that conducted and condoned this torture. We show the world why our country stands above others. We demonstrate why we are better and morally superior to our enemy.
Or, we don’t. Then we have TJ Jackson’s America.
TJ asks, “would any other nation’s media act this way in wartime?”
I know the Soviet Union’s didn’t act this way. The media in 1930s and 40s Germany didn’t. I know couple other countries whose media’s did “act this way” in wartime: how about Iran’s and Saddam’s Iraq.
Far North
You tell ’em TJ Jackson. Torture isn’t a problem. No siree, the media is the problem. The media is the enemy.
Let’s see here, US soldiers torture detainees to death. Media reports US soldieres tortured detainees to death. The media is pro-terrorist. The media is the problem. The media is the enemy.
How ’bout this TJ? We do all we can to stop the torture. We demand accountability of those that conducted and condoned this torture. We show the world why our country stands above others. We demonstrate why we are better and morally superior to our enemy.
Or, we don’t. Then we have TJ Jackson’s America.
TJ asks, “would any other nation’s media act this way in wartime?”
I know the Soviet Union’s didn’t act this way. The media in 1930s and 40s Germany didn’t. I know couple other countries whose media’s did “act this way” in wartime: how about Iran’s and Saddam’s Iraq.
Jimmie
I’m calling bullshit on points 4 and 5.
While it is true that police killed four people on the first day. They did not kill the remaining twelve who died as the riots continued and spread. Those people were killed in the riots themselves. Those riots were fed by the Newsweek story. Don’t believe me? Read the quotes from the rioters. Read the signs they were waving. Is Newsweek culpable for those deaths. Damned straight. They reported a BS story that anyone with two brain cells occasionally able of making contact with each other knew would make for perfect propaganda for our enemies.
Is the story true? Well we don’t know. No one knows. That’s exactly why the magazine should never have printed it. The threshold of reporting has not now, nor has ever been “let’s float some rumor out there and if no one disproves it, it must be true”. What Newsweek’s source is basically saying is “well, I think I saw the flushing mentioned in some report. I’m sure I saw it somewhere.” If that’s really the acceptable level of reporting, we might as well elevate sighitngs of Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster to the front pages of all our major newspapers. Hell, Weekly World News just became a major weekly newspaper!
What, it’s news because it echoes reports we’ve heard from detainees before? I wonder if Newsweek, when they’ve made this claim, have ever once bothered also to let us know that, according to the training manuals we’ve taken from captured terrorists, this is exactly what they’re trained to do. They’re supposed to make allegations that we’re disrecpecting the Koran by flushing it down the toilet. Those allegations are the ones that will cause the greatest outrage and are almost impossible to get rid of. We haven’t paid much attention to them in the past few years because…well..it’s propaganda. You don’t give propaganda any real credence. But now, since an official government source says he thought he saw something like this in some report somewhere, we bring the propaganda back as corroborating evidence? You have got to be kidding me. Shit is shit, no matter who’s flinging it.
Geoduck
Let’s not mince words here: it’s “US soldiers torture innocent detainees to death”
Just to get past the inevitable “they’re terrorists and had it coming” line.
TJ Jackson
Far North Troll:
AH yes the innocent detainees line. Is that like the innocent pedophile caught stuffing a 6 year old into the dumpster? Wee for the innocent detainee who was caught with 10 kilos of c4 and blasting caps. The nails he had were for that new house he was building not for the morning mosque bombing. Do you all have a Ted Rall shrine in your house?
AlanDownunder
Who needs Newsweek to inflame anti-US islamic sentiment when you’ve got this photo
(check out the gun barrel) from this page
of the USMC website.
Bush said it was a crusade. His tank marines and USMC HQ evidently believe it. Compared to that, what’s a flushed Koran page more or less?
syn
One the one hand, Isikoff is deemed a seasoned, highly capable, unbaised, aggressive journalist while one the other hand, he manages to report gossip based on one unidentified source.
How is it possible for a journalist who is held in such high regard manages to completely ignore the basic principles in Journalism 101?
Isikoff knew what he was doing, defending him is absurd.
RW
Greg Palast?
Good lord are you going to actually start relying on kos commenters next?
John Cole
No, Ricky, which is why I verified it with this:
http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?cat=Security&loid=8.0.165604742&par=0
You chose to ignore that.
RW
I didn’t ignore anything, only pointed out that I was baffled at the inclusion of someone who is batshit crazy as somehow a legitimate source.
Sorta like me saying: “both David Duke and the institute of mathematics said that 2+2=4”.
Far North
TJ,
I don’t understand you last point. Do you mean to say that because some detainees are guilty of terrorism and other crimes, all detainees are guilty? Just what is you point?
Libertine
I really amazed at the lengths some on the far right will go to try to defend this administration.
Up to this point in history the US had NEVER waged a war of aggression. We did that with this war using bogus intelligence on WoMD and false claims that Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks.
And while I am sure that some US soldiers may have tortured and killed our enemies in the past it has never been on “official” government position defending the use of torture. That has also changed with, then White House Counsel, Alberto Gonzalez’s memo defending torure. And come to find out kindnapping with the renditions we are involved in.
But instead all of the US’s credibility problems stem from Newsweek and a left-wing media bias? Alllllllrighty then!!!
TJ Jackson
North Troll:
Your limited comprehension is evident in your comments. Exactly why is it that you believe the detainees are innocent? Have you ever been in the service or more to the point under fire?
Far North
TJ,
Be productive. Go find Osama.
TJ Jackson
I have, he’s Far North Troll. Go back to your sandbox little boy. Come back when you have an education and some experience.
Kimmitt
I find the continued silence by many on my side of the aisle to be troubling.
I . . . guess. Any organization with as fundamentally corrupt an operating principle as the 11th Commandment is going to be quiet on the excesses of its leadership, no matter how egregious.