Right now, Isikoff and some folks at Newsweek are ordering a big glass of STFU for their critics:
An FBI agent wrote in a 2002 document made public on Wednesday that a detainee held at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, had accused American jailers there of flushing the Koran down a toilet.
The Pentagon said the allegation was not credible.
The declassified document’s release came the week after the Bush administration denounced as wrong a May 9 Newsweek article that stated U.S. interrogators at Guantanamo had flushed a Koran down a toilet to try to make detainees talk. The magazine retracted the article, which had triggered protests in Afghanistan in which 16 people died.
The newly released document, dated Aug. 1, 2002, contained a summary of statements made days earlier by a detainee, whose name was redacted, in two interviews with an FBI special agent, whose name also was withheld, at the Guantanamo prison for foreign terrorism suspects.
The American Civil Liberties Union released the memo and other FBI documents it obtained from the government under court order through the Freedom of Information Act.
“Personally, he has nothing against the United States. The guards in the detention facility do not treat him well. Their behavior is bad. About five months ago, the guards beat the detainees. They flushed a Koran in the toilet,” the FBI agent wrote.
“It’s not credible,” chief Pentagon spokesman Lawrence Di Rita said of the allegation regarding a Koran in a toilet.
I guess that means we need a talking points update:
1.) Newsweek Lied, People Died!
2.) The media hates the military.
3.) Why are they using anonymous sources?
4.) 1.) Why is the media recycling old stories?
5.) 2.) You can’t trust those terrorists.
6.) 3.) Even if it is true, you shouldn’t publish it- we are at war.
7.) 4.) You can’t trust Newsweek and the Washington Post Reuters.
5.) What about the children?
More here.
*** Update ***
I think some of you are really mistaking my position on this. Maybe this will clear things up:
I think you mistakenly believe I want this to be true. I don’t.
To be brutally honest, it wouldn’t really bother me if they flushed the Koran, as the book is essentially meaningless to me. I guess part of me would say- “Gee, you shouldn’t really do that, because many will see it as really offensive,” but that is about it.
That isn’t the way we decided to fuck this football, though. Wiser heads than mine, or at the very least, people in a position to make these decisions, chose to approach the whole Islam issue from a standpoint of extreme sensitivity. We said, from day one, that we wouldn’t violate any of these rules we had just created for religious tolerance and respect for Islamic rituals and artifacts.
Personally, I think degrading the Koran and Islam would be stupid, because it would seem to me you would want to dispel the rumors about the US being a bunch of heathens and gain their support during interrogations. I guess I have the ‘good cop’ mentality. But I don’t know the ins and outs of interrogation, either. And, the logic that this might inflame anti-American sentiments abroad does not escape me.
But, at any rate, regardless of what I thought, our position was that we would not do anything of this sort and that the military would not tolerate it. Thus, it shouldn’t happen.
But, apparently, it is. And, yes, I know that many of these people are trained to lie. Many criminals in the United States are similarly liars, and as someone who worked as a Probation Officer, I have seen it up close and personal. But, just because criminals tend to also be liars doesn’t always mean that they are lying all the time. Liars that they may be, inmates do get abused and beaten. Cops do step over the line.
And, as we have seen, so do military personnel. Right now, the overwhelming evidence is that some sort of this was and may be still going on, and it doesn’t offend me that it is happening so much out of the fact that they are doing it (the alleged and actual acts of Koran and religious abuses- not the torture. The torture infurtiates me.), but the fact that we said we would not be doing it and yet it appears to be happening anyway. In other words, we set up the rules and then went ahead and broke them.
Many of you still wish to cling to the idea that it never in any way, shape, or form, occurred. That just doesn’t fit the overwhelming evidence that some religious-type abuses did occur. That means we would have to disbelieve all of the following:
1.) The detainees and their lawyers
2.) Military personnel themselves
3.) FBI reports and experiences
4.) The ACLU
5.) The International Red Cross
6.) Amnesty International
And yes, I know the track records of all of those organizations, particularly the last three. I know that International Red Cross ambulances have been used by murderers and bomb smugglers in Israel. But, at some point, even if you have 400 known liars gathered together, when they all have the same damned story to tell, only a fool would dismiss their claims.
Add ot that all the other circumstantial evidence and facts, to include the confirmed and documented reports of actual torture and the documented other acts of abuse of religious principle (see menstrual blood and other psyops interrogation procedures that have been documented), all of which would lead a reasonable person to believe that desecrating the Koran by putting in the toilet JUST ISN’T THAT FUCKING EXTRAORDINARY A CLAIM.
Then, we have the silly mentality of those attacking the media because Isikoff, as the stories linked above show, was right about the allegations but wrong about the exact source, who lied to them. Then, that is used as a bludgeon to in effect attempt to censor the media in what really is just another saga in the age old battle of the right versus the media. It is enough to make a man insane.
A reasonable person, and all the unreasonable people overseas, are very right to suspect that this sort of religious abuse has happened. Attempting to bully the media over this is pointless and absurd, and it most certainly is not anti-military to document it and demand that it be investigated. After all, we agreed to play this game this way. Koran flushing may not necessarily offend me (and I would in no way consider it to be torture), but they do, and the government and military agreed with them that it is offensive.
Regardless, attacking the media over this is wrong and stupid, because anyway you look at it, the street is going to believe it. They have other ways of getting out the word than through the American media:
So, while they may be lying, most of the evidence would lead us to believe some level of what they are saying is true. Regardless, they are going to believe it, so attacking the damned media to attempt to cover it up or not talk openly about it is just stupid and counterproductive. And it doesn’t mean I hate the military. It doesn’t mean I believe every accusation against the United States and our boys. It does mean I have looked around and I see what I see.
So, please. Cut the crap. It isn’t unreasonable to suspect this stuff happened, and it isn’t in any way helpful to launch this petty jihad against the media. Not to mention the administration’s cynical behavior in aiding the anti-Newsweek and general anti-media cause.
And, I might add, that when it comes to defendant’s rights, many of you are aware I am a pretty limp-wristed weenie when it comes to the rights of the accused. I went along with Gitmo and everything in the beginning. But if I were in the jury box today, presented all the evidence about the alleged Korand flushing and other nonsense, I would be hard pressed not to convict. In my view of things, we are beyond a reasonable doubt.
Does that clear things up?
*** Update ***
The General in charge of Gitmo held a press conference, and provided a preliminary report on the allegations. Some abuses were found, som were not, and, most importantly, the Koran flushing was not found to be true.
Good. I was wrong to believe all those reports, but I still don’t think, given all the reports and the other actual misconduct, it was unreasonable to suspect that it had happened. At any rate, I have to ask- what did the media do wrong? I actually watched the press confernce held live in the mainstream media. It will be reported widely tomorrow thee is no factual basis for these claims.
Why is that a bad thing- dispelling rumors with clear and transparent media coverage? Why the need to villify the press, to resort to talking points when you don’t have any more facts than I did- just suspicions (which, in this case, turned out to be true).
How did the system not work? Our soldiers, far from being sullied by scurrilous reports, have been vinidcated. This is good, no?
syn
“It’s not credible.” Probably due to the fact that the ACLU released it. And yes, based upon the egregious actions displayed by the ALCU over the past thirty years I’ll believe “The Man” before I’ll ever fall blindly in line to anything the ACLU puts out.
Go get em’ John.
Libertine
So let me see if I got this right…
1) Newsweek is responsible for riots in the Arab world according to the Bush Administration even though Gen. Myers said the story wasn’t the reason for the riots
2) Now the Pentagon is saying the FBI is lying.
Gotta love it when our government can’t even agree with one another. Is this considered “staying on message”? lol!!!
XB
So an inmate told an FBI agent a guard flushed a Koran. Oh,OK.Of course inmates would never lie, now would they? Especially if it might get their guards in trouble with the FBI,right?
Libertine
Oh, but of course…FBI agents are so naive that they would buy that BS hook, line and sinker. What was I thinking?
Brian J.
Read it again.
The FBI agent quotes a detainee who makes the allegations. The Pentagon said the detainee’s report was not credible.
So what you have is another source of hearsay, essentially. Someone else (an FBI agent) reports that someone said that a Koran was flushed.
Were I in that interview, I could say, yes, the detainee said that. However, unless I was present at the actual Koran flushing, I’d have to add the caveat that I was only repeating what someone said. The Pentagon reports that further investigation proved the detainee was not credible.
So some people accept the accusation, but not the results of further investigation. All of which are conducted by third parties outside of the “some people.”
I guess it’s a Rorschach test. Which source one calls credible for the actual flushing–not just the sources who report that an alleged flushing occurred–determines something about the commenter.
John Cole
XB- See the new talking points. Although you used the new talking point #2 appropriately. For maximum effect, I would suggest mentioning this is an old story first, and then, as an aside, mention that these terrorists are prone to lying.
Like such:
“This happened in 2002- why is Reuters even bringing up this old story? Besides, everyone knows these inmates lie and are trained to do this in their manuals.”
You have much to learn, Padawan.
John Cole
Brian J.- Of course it is just an allegation from an inmate. That is what everything is unless you have Abu Gharib style photos or hard forensic evidence (like dead cab drivers with pulpified thighs).
Libertine
And of course we should just believe the Pentagon since they said so? Again I think that Newsweek did a horrible job on the story but just because the Pentagon denies something it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. But since the government is in lockdown mode in terms of accountability I guess we have no choice but to take their word.
Gold Star for Robot Boy
“And of course we should just believe the Pentagon since they said so?”
Of course!
The ghost of Cpl. Pat Tillman told me military officials never lie.
willyb
How is a bare statement, made in 2002 by a detainee at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, somehow vindication for Isikoff’s / Newsweek’s sloppy reporting???
ppgaz
In the lifecycle of stories like this, I’d guesstimate that we are, at most, at the halfway point. There will be more to come.
The thing about living in a faith-based world of bullshit is that reality has its way of asserting itself.
You can see them there, in Washington, and in the studios of the talk show horse manure factory, ginning up some new line of bamboozlement to keep up with these pesky stories.
Like George said during the debates: This stuff is just Hard Work.
JPS
John, could you please make up an alternative list of talking points for those of us who are as pissed off at the right as you are?
Be sure to include that all detainees released from Guantanamo were innocent. They never did hate the US–but they sure do now!
Don’t get me wrong–for all I know this guy really does have nothing against the US, and his Koran really was flushed, and if that’s true I deplore his treatment as much as you do.
But (a) I don’t particularly hope it’s true, so I’m as ready to disbelieve it as believe it; and (b) I still have this pedantic preference fcr news stories to be proven true before they come out. I guess that makes me a Newsweek critic, but I’ll still pass on that glass of STFU.
And remember, this fellow did not corroborate his earlier allegation. Nor did he retract it. HE’S FUCKING NEUTRAL ON IT! (Sorry–the habit is catching.)
Al Maviva
I went to the ACLU site to check out the details of all the horrid abuses of the Koran by our troops. You haven’t even scratched the surface. Here ya go with some examples of the allegations the FBI was diligently running down.
http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/052505/
“Detainee REDACTED, however, reiterated the statement he made during his previous interview on 3/14/03, that he would not provide any information until the U.S. Government and interrogators in Camp Delta changed the way it treated the Muslim holy book, the Koran. When asked for examples when he had personally witnessed the mistreatment of the Koran, REDACTED could offer none. Instead REDACTED referred to general examples of claimed abuse, wherein soldiers, who were non-believers, had touched the book when searching it.”
Hmmm… They touched the Koran. That’s a serious abuse allegation. We need to put a stop to that. Here’s another:
“Detainee REDACTED stated that the treatment of the Koran continued to be the reason for his unwillingness to cooperate. REDACTED was asked how the mistreatment of the Koran had taken place. REDACTED stated that the issue continued to be based on what the detainees perceived as the use of the Koran as a weapon. It was taken from them and returned at will, with little consideration for the value which they placed in the book. REDACTED was asked if he had ever seen the Koran mistreated or intentionally mishandled. He had not. REDACTED was asked if he had ever seen the Koran thrown around, tossed on the ground or mistreated in any way. He had not . . . . REDACTED was informed that his case for the proper treatment of the Koran had been taken to higher levels and presented as a serious issue. The effort had been hurt, however, because it had been found that detainees were hiding things within the pages of the Koran.”
The nerve of those zionists, taking away the Korans when inmates misbehaved, or hid contraband in them. How dare they disrespect the Koran in such a way. Another:
“Detainee is presently on a hunger strike regarding talking with interrogators due to an alleged incident involving an interrogator humiliating the Koran during the interrogation of another detainee. REDACTED did not witness the incident and only heard about it through hearsay. . . . Beginning today, they are also starting a hunger strike. REDACTED stated the strike would end once the detainees saw something in writing regarding the prohibition of acts that humiliate the Koran and/or Islam.”
Yes, we should stop humiliating the Koran. For sure. No argument here. Let’s see what other abuses there were.
“REDACTED stated the issues regarding the Koran led to this . . . He commented that the Koran should not be used as a form of punishment. Also the searching of the Koran needs to be looked into. The guards need to be made aware of how they are humiliating the Koran.”
Yeah, the searching of the Koran. That needs to stop. Where else can a loyal Islamic fighter put his stash, otherwise? It gets worse though.
“REDACTED stated that it was an abuse of the Koran for non-believers to handle the Koran.”
Well, that’s a reasonable request, I think, and a serious abuse allegation right there. What the Army needed to do, was to provide Korans without any filthy infidels, especially filthy infidels with names like “Steinberg” from handling it. How insane is that, that the military thought they could get away with touching a Koran. Presumably, they should have been flying the Korans to Gitmo in on a halal aircraft, piloted by Muslim pilots. Really observant Muslim pilots at that. I hear Zacharias Moussaoui may be available to fly.
“detainee stated that “some unknown detainees are not talking in retaliation to an incident where a guard kicked the Koran.”
Holy shit. There’s your abuse. I guess I’ve been wrong all along, the Army was lying. Some piece of shit guard kicked a Koran. I’m ashamed. That sumbitch. I admit John, I’m totally wrong. The abuse clearly happened. Roll out the JAG corps and let’s get some trials goin’. Call Amnesty, now! But wait, it gets worse!
“[t]he Camp Delta detainee uprising which occurred on or about 19-20 July 2002, was started when one detainee claimed that a guard dropped a Koran. In actuality the detainee dropped the Koran and then blamed the guard. Many other detainees reacted to this claim and this initiated the uprising.”
You realize, it’s much much worse than the Army guards abusing the Koran. Clearly, this is a whitewash of the guards’ Koran kicking. Now the FBI is lying to cover up the Koran abuse too! Isikoff was right, he just didn’t go far enough. Fake, but bloody accurate.
And sure enough, there is an account of flushing the Koran, if you keep reading the litany of alleged Koran abuses.
“REDACTED had no information against the United States. Personally, he has nothing against the United States. The guards in the detention facility do not treat him well. Their behavior is bad. About five months ago, the guards beat the detainees. They flushed a Koran in the toilet. The guards dance around when the detainees are trying to pray. The guards still do these things.”
Well, there you go. It’s proven. It surely must have happened. This poor prisoner, who has nothing against the United States in spite of being locked up and tortured for years, witnessed it. But let’s get to the nub of it.
“REDACTED advised it was worse than Hitler’s treatment of the Jews. . . . They often disgrace the Koran by throwing it on the cell floor and frequently use profanity which many of the detainees find extremely offensive.”
Well, I guess you were right John, and I was wrong. There’s all sorts of Koran abuse going on at Gitmo. Just look at all the allegations – at least the ones that are credible, if you can figure out which ones they are. If you give me a little while, I’ll try to explain how a false rumor that a guard kicked a Koran one time caused an uprising, but actual Koran flushing and the regular throwing of the Koran on the floor went apparently unremarked upon by the 500 or so detainees. Meanwhile, I’ll choke down that big glass of STFU that Mikey Isikoff wants me to pound, and wait for your analysis of the allegations, and whether we should take them as credible. In the meantime, I’ll be reading the Al Qaida operations manual, available off the DOJ website, in which Al Qaida instructs fighters to allege torture and abuse whenever they are in court or have the media’s ear.
ppgaz
Well, that’s even worse than alleging WMD and an Iraq nuclear threat and a Hussein connection to 9-11.
Isn’t it?
Gee, you don’t seem to know whom to believe any more, Al.
Have faith, man. Faith.
willyb
“The thing about living in a faith-based world of bullshit is that reality has its way of asserting itself.”
Reality is an equal opportunity slap in the face for everybody willing to listen and learn. What is the “reality” you speak of? And why so negative about faith-based people? Don’t you believe in diversity?
dagon
thank you libertine!
i posted the myers’ statements TWICE here and no one…no one mind you, even bothered to read the damn link. (certainly no one commented on them).
and guess what people? the so-called ‘liberal’ mainstream media is still not picking up on the story either. even in this most recent piece from reuters, they still credit the newsweek piece for inciting the riots, with no reference to myers’ comments whatsoever.
i would ask all of you ‘america-loving’ people to wake up and stop playing this like a game between the red sox and the yankees.
unless we cut this crap and start promoting some serious critical-thinking skill, this ‘experiment’ that we call the united states has got some rocky times ahead.
peace
ppgaz
“Reality is an equal opportunity .. for everybody willing to listen and learn.”
The hell you say!
“What is the ‘reality’ you speak of?” Gee, I dunno, maybe that the real story here is that the so-called War on Terror is going to make you put up with some really ugly shit, willy, and maybe Michael Isikoff is about as important in the grand scheme of things as Jennifer Wilbanks is? I retort, you decide.
“Don’t you believe in diversity?”
Of course I do. How else to explain you asking that nonsensical question?
XB
John Cole:Well,thank you for responding-but AREN’T they trained to lie? Doesn’t the fact that the FBI was sent down to Gitmo way back in 2002 undercut the idea that the administation was ignoring detainee abuse? Along this line I recall that the army was investigating abuse at Abu Ghraib a long time before the scandal broke.Didn’t the photos first come to light when they were passed along to the press by a defense lawyer for one the abusers? Was that an example of the Pentagon ignoring abuse? It seems to me somebody else should be getting a big glass of STFU.
JPS
ppgaz:
“the so-called War on Terror ”
OK, I was trying (perhaps lamely) to be wry earlier, but now I am absolutely serious. Not being polemical, not trying to pick a fight.
What do you mean by that?
willyb
ppgaz
Thanks for the glib, vacuous, “answer.”
Non-Fat Latte Liberal
“What about the children?”
Fabulous. Hillarious. Excellent post.
Cheers!
john(lesser)
Accusations of mistreatment of any kind are a dime a dozen. NEWSWEEK claimed to have confirmation of the allegations from an “unnamed source at the pentagon”. Comparing NEWSWEEK”s story to any run of the mill “Muhamed says he was mistreated” story is laughably weak.
willyb
“maybe Michael Isikoff is about as important in the grand scheme of things as Jennifer Wilbanks is?”
I would agree with this comment, but for the apparent, unintended consequences of Isikoff’s “journalism.” However, I don’t blame Isikoff for these consequences. I will assume innocence on his part. However, Newsweek is supposed to have standards that minimize the chance of unsubstantiated stories seeing the light of day. I do blame Newsweek.
Thanks to the cumulative effects of lies and half-truths about America, the Arab world doesn’t need much to be provoked. Crap like the sloppy Newsweek piece, and this thing today about something that alledgedly happened 3 years ago, are just another log on the Mideast fire.
ppgaz
JPS: Several things.
First, I don’t think that there is, in reality, any such thing as a ‘war on terror.’ I don’t think terror is a thing you can have a war with. It doesn’t have territory, it’s not a people, or an army. It think it is a marketing slogan and I think it’s bullshit.
I think you can have a war on vulnerability to terror. You can protect your borders, your military bases, your power plants and your water treatement and delivery facilities, and your food chain. You can protect your cities and your infrastructure and your airline flights. You can protect against public health threats to some extent. You can, in short, make yourself a hell of a lot safer without crawling into a cave or staying home and locking the doors.
I think that the assault on the Taliban was a good idea. I think that Afghanistan had a recent enough history of responsible self-rule to make it a good candidate for rescue from the fanatics.
I do not think that a war on Iraq advances any “war on terror.” I think that a properly thought out foreign policy and less extreme measures could, and would, have achieved the same level of improvement in the Middle East as the dishonestly sold, poorly planned and now, apparently, endless military operation in Iraq could have achieved.
Iraq was “liberated” from people who were, first, and last, thieves. That’s all. Thieves out to help themselves to the wealth of their country. Just like the Shah of Iran and the Saudi Royal Family, who, along with Hussein, have all been sucked up to by this country in my lifetime. And all for the same reason, a well know 3-letter word that rhymes with “boil.”
I don’t believe in the War on Terror because the liars who are “running” it don’t believe in it either. These are the same people who told me in 1991 or so that Saddam Hussein was as big a threat as Hitler … and then left him in power. The same ones who sold him weapons and tried to use him in the regional contest with Iran. The same ones who thought it was okay to go fishing after hearing that Osama Bin Laden was out to attack the United States in August, 2001. The same ones who fiddled around with a Terror Alert color code that was an insult to the intelligence of every American, and who try daily to equate questioning or criticism of this war and its adjunct horrors with a lack of patriotism, or with a lack of support for our troops. Let me be brief now because I have to go do something else: I don’t trust these potatoheads, and I don’t buy their baloney “War on Terror” any more than I buy “Defense of Marriage” or their twisted version of “Family Values.” I think all three of those slogans came from the same place … cynical political manipulators.
Oh, and thanks for asking.
synuclein
OK — so the detainees are lying SoB’s when they talk to the Red Cross about incidents of Koran abuse, but they’re telling the truth when asked by an FBI agent (while still incarcerated at Gitmo) and they say nothing.
I truthfully don’t know one way or another about the status of this whole thing (true or not on the flushing or other abuse) but I know I’d be pretty PO’d if someone tossed the Bible in the dirt and started stomping on it — as alleged to have occured in Afghanistan (not just Gitmo, and this speaks towards a trend or technique, not just a “few bad apples”).
Also, you’ve got to figure that these detainees are less likely to tell the truth to an FBI agent (as a representative of the US) while in the custody of the US (and in an environment where being a troublesome inmate can result in extended periods in “stress positions”). I know, if I were them, I’d be quiet during discussions with US officials, to reduce the risk that something bad would happen, and more likely to talk with the Red Cross — who are there to help.
None of this means that I can tell whether the inmates were telling the truth or lying — but as more evidence comes out (little by little), the case for the administration telling the truth looks weaker and the case for the detainees telling the truth looks stronger.
JPS
ppgaz:
Reason I asked is this. It seems to me that there is growing support for the idea that the whole idea of a terror threat was overblown–either through fear or cynical calculation–and that our entire foreign policy is an overreaction to it. There is a big difference to me between that and the notion that there is a very real threat and we are reducing it the wrong way.
I admire your ability to pack cheap shots densely yet readably into your last paragraph. I disagree strenuously with your first, fourth and fifth paragraphs, but you make good (if endlessly debatable) points in them.
In any case, thanks for the substantive response. You had no obligation to provide it, of course, but I was interested to know where you were coming from.
JPS
One more thing, ppgaz–I mentioned the notion that “we are reducing [the threat] the wrong way.” I realize you disagree that we’re doing so at all. Didn’t mean to try to steal a base there.
Kimmitt
There is a big difference to me between that and the notion that there is a very real threat and we are reducing it the wrong way.
There is a definite threat, but there is no question that it has been massively overblown for domestic purposes.
The proof of this, to me, lies in the fact that the Administration is so disinterested in common-sense responses (port security, nonproliferation, Russian nukes) and so gung ho on “whatever they were going to do anyway.” It sounds to me like they know things aren’t that bad and they can use the hysteria to get their agenda passed with little fear of being shown up as failures.
ppgaz
JPS, I’ll look forward to more with you on this. Not tonight, though …. a new grandchild arrived this evening and we’re a little tired around here. Especially grandma, who coached through a 14 hour labor. Etc.
As for “reducing the threat the wrong way” vs “not reducing it” … I’m not convinced that we are reducing it much, but I am very convinced that there were better ways to go about it. That’s all speculative, of course, niether of us can see the future. What I really resent is the cynical and deliberate manipulation. As you see, I don’t trust these people any farther that I can toss a sack of Portland cement.
Have a good evening.
Seumas
Something I heard on a news report on one “reputable” network is that:
1 – Newsweek admitted that the “informant” was referring to a report he had skimmed through some time prior, when he had worked at the Pentagon;
and
2 – the Pentagon researched the “Newsweek informant’s” allegation and found a report (possibly gtom GitMo) which stated that an inmate claimed that a Guard had flushed the Koran, but the guards and several other inmates stated that the first inmate had flushed pages from the Koran in an attempt to deliberately overflow the toilet and flood the room.
Having worked in a Detention Facility, I know that inmates right here in the US of A diliberately flood their toilets (especially if they know their cell is directly above the Computer Room – which is what happened in my case) and therefore it is reasonable to assume that other inmates in other places may come up with the same idea. . .
And, I agree that the “War on Terror” is bullshit. Every time “The Government” releases an “alert” they CAUSE more terror than 9-11 actually did.
Yeah, it was horrible. Yeah, it was a shock. Yeah, it was scary.
Oh, yeah, it was predictable – the same people tried to take down the same buildings many years ago by detonating a Ryder truck full of explosives in the basement garage. Remember that?
Georgie wanted an excuse to spend money (gee, let’s send it to corporations we own – read: Haliburton), raise Oil prices (oh, yeah, the Bush Family owns a bunch of that, too) and generally rape the American Public for HIS OWN PROFIT.
Hell, I still think he may have helped plan the attack in the first place. Look what it did for his approval ratings. And it got him re-elected. That NEVER would have happened without an event like 9-11. He wasn’t even elected the first time.
syn
I just read the Al Queda training manual available throught the Dept. of Justice.
John, ever consider the possibility that you are falling for the very weapon our enemy is using to destroy us.
Think the editors and journalists over at Newsweek have taken the time to read Al Qaeda’s training manuel? Or, have they too fallen for such a destructive weapon.
And, after reading the last comment basically aiding the enemy’s cause, it appears that the Al Qaeda training manual is quite effective in drawing the masses into believing such disasterous lies of epic proportions.
May I suggest you read the training manual John, before you begin defending this ruthless and unwielding enemy because you are falling for our enemy’s most effective weapon, that being, using our own liberal philosophy to turn against ourselves. Sadly, our media has already fallen.
syn
The support given to Saddam back in the 1980’s was 1.9 billion (1% of the 120 billion in loan)from the department of agriculture, the weapon of mass destructions we gave was a form of anthrax commonly used around the world for agricultural purposes.
On the other hand Russia gave 47% and who knows what ordance and state secrets the russian mafia sold to Saddam (I lived in Moscow during the time the cease fire was declared in the early 1990’s and heard all sorts of info regarding what the russian mafia was seeing throughout the Mid East. I returned to NYC in 1992 and a year later the first WTC bombing occurred but sadly Americans buried their heads in La LA Land Entertainment) As I recall, didn’t the first WTC bomber have confirmed connections to Saddam Hussein? The answer is: YES.
War has been waged upon America and the West for a quarter of a century yet people still believe that the WOT began on 9/11/02.
I’m not falling for this La La bullshit again.
By the way the next in line of supporting Saddam in the 1980’s was France then China so please piss off on the whole theory that we ‘we gave Saddam his power’ conspiracy theory.
syn
Correction 9/11/01.
syn
Should read ‘what the russian mafia was selling’
Al Maviva
I think there are probably some real abuses going on at Gitmo. I’m pretty sure the CIA is crossing the line into torture, as long as you define that as beating, and waterboarding. I’m also pretty sure that a few of the military interrogators have, unsanctioned (there’s a Rumsfeld policy in place against it) chucked a Koran around.
But based on the AQ manual, and reading the FBI’s summaries of their investigations into the allegations, I’m not even close to seeing a preponderance of the evidence that Koran flushing and rampant Koran abuse is going on at Gitmo. When the detainees, to a man, define Koran abuse as one of us filthy non-Salafi infidels touching the book, then everything is abuse. Read the interview summaries at the ACLU web site on your own, then come back and tell me their stories prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. (That means to a moral certainty, you’d stake your life on it that the allegations are true). I just don’t see it. Yeah, there’s probably abuses going on, but this ain’t it. The NY Times article from last week struck me as a much better grounded allegation of abuse, and I take it as fact that the 519th MI did engage in illegal acts against two detainees.
This discussion is healthy, but only if we all go to the primary documents and do our homework, and try to think critically about what we are reading. Relying on the MSM or some a-hole on the internet to filter this kind of allegation, is like… well, relying on the MSM or the internet.
example
So there’s a room containing a prisoner, a toilet and a copy of the Koran. And nothing else.
Then there’s an interrogator on “bad cop” duty whose job is to be mean to the prisoner.
I don’t care what the rules say, somewhere along the line, the Koran is going to get put in the toilet to be mean to the prisoner.
Jeff
John,
As i’ve said many times, I’m a soon to be ex-Republican too, for most of the same reasons you mention. We’re pretty much on the same page with all this stuff.
that being said, while I think the “Newsweek lied, people died” crowd is a bunch of blithering idiots, I also don’t think Newsweek really has any right to tell the other side to eat crow based on the fact that this stuff has turned out to be true.
I think most people realize it was true. It doesn’t excuse them running an incredibly poorly sourced story.
Let’s assume for a second that everything CBS said about Bush’s guard service was true. does that mean if somewhere down the road, it gets proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, that CBS is off the hook for running a story based on bogus documents?
These arguments that nothing matters as long as the general crux of the story is true is idiotic (and i’m not saying that you yourself are saying that).
JPS
Wayyyy off topic (‘scuse me, John):
ppgaz–I had to duck out right after commenting. (Work does have this tendency to intrude.) If I may, congratulations (!) on the new grandchild, and I hope all are well.
Stan
Let’s see, a detainee makes a charge, the FBI notes the allegation, and you assume it’s fact.
Got it…..
ppgaz
Sorry, I can’t buy the “terrorists are lying to hurt us” angle on this story.
How stupid would we have to be to allow that sort of thing to go, and percolate for THREE YEARS without being able to get a handle on it?
Could we not have the results of thorough DOD investigation into the matter? The results of independent (say, Red Cross) audits and monitoring of this issue? Simple mechanisms to label, identify and account for all Korans in the camp?
This is 2005, not 1905. If these potatoheads running Gitmo and running the Pentagon can’t get a handle on this thing, and control the activities at the camp, and provide simple, understandable assurances that rules are being followed and abuses are being prevented …. then whoever is running that show needs to be replaced.
Instead, the stories keep coming, through various channels, and if you want to believe that there is no fire associated with all this smoke, good for you …. but I don’t. Unfortunately, the draconian measures being employed here, the secrecy, and the lack of due process insisted on by the administration have only heightened the impression that the camp is a pit of human rights abuses and that the people in charge just want to cover it up and cry “Foul!” when stories get out.
So, I’m not unreasonable. Maybe it is a “Foul!”. It should be possible to prove that, at least going forward. To me, the thick veil of secrecy here is just a little too thick. Something smells here.
I’ll give the people in charge the benefit of some very, very big doubt. Okay, fine, the past is past. Now show me, going forward, how you are going to manage this situation better.
Nelson Muntz
Ha. Ha!
tbrosz
Al Maviva: Get the feeling you’re shouting into an empty room? Do you understand how many people, regardless of actual documentation, WANT this to be true? Certainly Newsweek, which makes no effort to hide its anti-war stance, does. A coordinated effort by prisoners to pull the wool over the eyes of human rights organizations, which are equally eager to find this kind of abuse, is not something that would require professional terrorist training.
ppgaz
tbrosz, if you held the government to the same standard that you seem to hold for Newsweek, I’d be a lot more impressed.
I have no reason, based on fact and evidence, to believe anything the officials say about these things, to take their assertions at face value.
If it’s easier for you to believe that an honest, competant civilian authority in the Pentagon is vulnerable to a few dishonest, incomeptant journalists, good for you. I don’t believe that. All evidence points to the probability that the opposite is true.
“WMD? Well, they could have been moved to another country.” GW Bush, March, 2004.
Right, right. I believe that. Moved to another country, under the eye of satellite and aerial surveillance that kept track of truckloads of oil on a daily basis.
Dr. John
Ok, so if I accuse you of beating your wife with no evidence other than I don’t like you, and it later turns out you have been accused of beating your wife (by, of course, your wife), then I’m vindicated? B.S. on steroids. You don’t make those accusations without the goods. Period. But the larger point is what Newsweek chooses to report. Why not just write a story about US soldiers masturbating to the images of Arab women, in fact, wives of Arab men? It’s almost certainly true, isn’t it? If all they want is dirty laundry, they’ll find it. And you’ll eat it up.
JPS
[This is the part where I invite a big heapin’ helping of outraged scorn, because it’s more fun than the work I ought to be doing.]
ppgaz:
“if you held the government to the same standard that you seem to hold for Newsweek, I’d be a lot more impressed.”
I don’t. Here’s why. The government went to war on the basis of estimates that they knew at the time merely might be true. I don’t consider this the same as Newsweek publishing reports of abuse that merely might be true.
If you believe a proven mass murdering, megalomaniac dictator might be awfully close to obtaining WMD, and we can stop him in time, then the downside to waiting until you know to an absolute certainty is that you might suffer a mass casualty attack. We were, in this view, foreclosing the risk of a possible catastrophe.
[Insert endless debate over how real that risk was, whether the mess we’re in now is balanced at all by scaring Libya into admitting the extent of their nuclear program, and thus learning a lot we didn’t know about AQ Khan’s nuclear proliferation ring; plus whether shaking up the whole rotten order in the Middle East that leads to Islamic terrorism has put us at greater risk or will make us safer in the long run, or both; and whether we should get any moral credit for ending the reign of an exceptionally cruel tyrant even thought we did it for entirely selfish reasons.]
The downside to Newsweek’s waiting until they were absolutely sure of their story was…what, again?
ppgaz
Nope, I can’t agree with any of it, JPS.
First of all, you think that the insiders believed WMD because that’s what they told you they believed it. To be blunt, I have no reason whatever to believe that they are telling the truth. I have plenty of reason to think otherwise. Take the British documents which show planning for a war before you and I even suspected that such a thing might be contemplated. The Prime Minister of Britain had the guts to admit that he lied about it. Do you think anyone in our bunch of liars over here would make that admission? I do not.
Second, I had then, and have now, no reason to think that SH had any motive, or intent, to be a proximate threat to the United States. I thought then, and think now, that he was a thief whose only interest was in keeping himself in power while he stuffed his pockets. I saw then, and see now, no evidence that he ever had any designs on regional conquest or especially conflict beyond his region. His foray into Kuwait was simply a land (oil) grab of treasure that some Iraqi historians might agree was taken from Iraq by the bungling of the British 80 years ago. I am not enough of a historian of that period to confirm it, but it makes sense. The British basically drew a few lines on the map and told those infuriating Arabs they were on their own, after they found out … as we are now .. that they couldn’t straighten the place out as occupiers.
Your argument seems to be that anything positive that happens in the region now can only be said to have happened because of the Iraq war we are waging. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc? Thanks, I’ll take a pass on that sort of logic. They taught me in high school that that was a logical fallacy, and I still believe it.
As for your last question, a well disguised strawman type argument disguised as a query (a rhetorical straw man construct?) …The Newsweek story is largely irrelevant in this scenario. History will record that the story made little difference to anyone except people on the right who make a living off these things. The larger, general “abuse” story, whatever you think it is and whatever you think it means, makes the Newsweek item nothing but a tiny blip on the radar.
Which is one of the points that I think John Cole is making in this suite of threads, and a point with which I concur, whether he is, or not.
ppgaz
PS, JPS … yes, mother and daughter are doing fine.
I’ve been instructed that my job now, as in the past, is to continue doing as I am told and to let the women take care of everything.
Darrell
ppgaz wrote:Your argument seems to be that anything positive that happens in the region now can only be said to have happened because of the Iraq war we are waging.
Khaddafi says he gave up his nuclear ambitions and opened up for inspections because of what he saw happen in Iraq. I see little doubt that this same intimidation worked to get Syrian troops out of Lebanon without firing a shot. Your argument seems to be that nothing positive that happens in that region could have happened because of the Iraq war we are waging.
Also, what makes you think that a mass murdering sociopath like Saddam, who had invaded two of his neighboring countries, launched missiles into Israel, funded suicide bombers, and put a hit out on Bush Sr… on what basis do you not think he would have gladly passed chemical, bio, or any other weapon he could get his hands on to those who are trying to kill us? Oh yeah, Saddam can be trusted right?
As for Tony Blair admitting to have “lied” (your word)about WMDs, perhaps you will enlighten us with some evidence/links to back up this claim of yours
firebrand
It’s refreshing to see that there are responsible conservatives who aren’t willing to turn a blind eye towards prisoner abuse and torture. We moderates aren’t going to lose the GOP without a fight. Go get ’em John.
Darrell
Al Maviva nails it:
“But based on the AQ manual, and reading the FBI’s summaries of their investigations into the allegations, I’m not even close to seeing a preponderance of the evidence that Koran flushing and rampant Koran abuse is going on at Gitmo.”
That about says it all, doesn’t it?
ppgaz
Wow, you guys are really at it today. Must be circle the wagons time.
1. Blair lied about WMD? I said nothing of the sort. I said that he lied about the fact that an Iraq war was being planned long before anyone outside of 13 Downing Street and the White House knew about it. Widely reported, easy to verify. It’s recent, fresh news.
2. One argument stream seems to have morphed into “Well, they aren’t flushing all the Korans down all the toilets …. why the big deal?” You know, how big a deal this is depends on whom you ask. Personally, I don’t think it’s that big a deal. But the rightwing gum-flappers want to have this both ways:
a) The Koran incidents aren’t that big a deal!! (A view with which I agree).
b) But Newsweek reporting it is a really big deal!!
Uh, excuse me, if the flush, or alledged flush, is no big deal, how can the story be a big deal? If our attitude is going to be “I’ll flush any damned thing I want down your toilet”, fine. I consider that to be much more arguable than the idea that Newsweek is guilty of some big offense. They aren’t.
I don’t think that the copies of the Koran in the camp are sacrosanct, nor do I consider the publication of the allegations to be blasphemy. Both ideas are bullshit.
3) The statement that “nothing positive … could have happened because of … the war we are waging” is nonsensical, and is not what I said, or meant, at all. What I said and meant is, I am not going to assign credit to the war for every positive thing that happens over there. That’s about as basic a logical fallacy as you will find, and I ain’t buyin it. Period.
Darrell
ppgaz, on second reading, I see you were referring to Blair admitting to have “lied” about planning the war, not about WMD’s. I stand corrected on that detail. However, I cannot find any articles where Blair admitted that he “lied” about this. Please provide evidence/links
I agree with your opinion that the copies of the Koran in the camp are not sacrosanct,and I would also add that stomping on a Koran does not equate to torture as ‘firebrand’ seems to suggest
Do you agree that Libya opening up for inspections, Iraqi elections, and Syria removing troops from Lebanon are all amazingly good outcomes which resulted from our war in Iraq?
ppgaz
Darrel,
Last question: No.
First part: I’ll look around. It was pretty much all over the news a week or so ago.
But it may be a few hours before I get back to you. I have been called to domestic duty.
ppgaz
Darrel, can’t find it. I must therefore retract the assertion.
I may have misread, or it may have been written as ” says Blair admitted he lied …” which would make my assertion unsupportable in this context.
In either case, the assertion is withdrawn.
ppgaz
Darrel, can’t find it. I must therefore retract the assertion.
I may have misread, or it may have been written as ” says Blair admitted he lied …” which would make my assertion unsupportable in this context.
In either case, the assertion is withdrawn.
RepubAnon
I find it difficult to believe we’ve got people in the military that would torture and kill detainees, but would NOT mistreat a book.
As for the detainee “retracting” his story – yeah, right. Smart money says interrogators told him he’d be released if he retracted his story – and waterboarded if he confirmed it.
Gitmo was and is a monument to reactionary stupidity. Any data these folks ever had, if any, is long outdated. The only reason they’re still there is that Mr. Bush thinks he’d have to admit to a mistake for putting them there in the first place if he let them go. That, and the fact that anyone who wasn’t a dedicated terrorist before imprisonment sure as heck is a terrorist supporter now, if only to seek revenge for their treatment.
RepubAnon
I find it difficult to believe we’ve got people in the military that would torture and kill detainees, but would NOT mistreat a book.
As for the detainee “retracting” his story – yeah, right. Smart money says interrogators told him he’d be released if he retracted his story – and waterboarded if he confirmed it.
Gitmo was and is a monument to reactionary stupidity. Any data these folks ever had, if any, is long outdated. The only reason they’re still there is that Mr. Bush thinks he’d have to admit to a mistake for putting them there in the first place if he let them go. That, and the fact that anyone who wasn’t a dedicated terrorist before imprisonment sure as heck is a terrorist supporter now, if only to seek revenge for their forced Caribbean vacation.
Cog
Uh, hold the glass of STFU juice. Isikoff was wrong. He said that an upcoming military report was going to substantiate a Koran flushing accusation.
The recently released FBI memo did no such thing, even with the MSM and anti-Bush bloggers struggling to make it do so. The FBI memo documented new ACCUSATIONS. And the detainee who made the new flushing accusation retracted it as well on the 14th. Not as quick as Newsweek, but don’t you think that is an important factoid?
If you follow the Arab press at all, then you know that Koran desecration accusations are common policy. After Fallujah, one man said on Al Jazeera a Koran was ripped in half and peed on by an American soldier. Another said a similar accusation on Al Jazeera after Operation Matador. And just last Monday there was a fake report of destroying a mosque and painting crosses on the walls and on the cover of a Koran.
Investigate what happened at Gitmo, but dont proclaim with front page, bold type headlines that every accusation is proof that attrocities happened. And at least state the Arab media and Al Qaeda policies of making false desecration accusations.
Unbelievable.
kathryn from sunnyvale
“Aren’t THEY trained to lie?” assumes that all the prisoners were in fact trained at some point prior to Gitmo. Which is true because we wouldn’t make mistakes in who we bring to Gitmo. But then we have released many of them, which means we’ve made a huge mistake in releasing trained operatives back to their countries. Or they weren’t trained before Gitmo, but have picked up some lessons while there- also a mistake given we’re letting some go home.
scs
C’mon, anyone who has ever struggled with plumbing KNEW the story was fake. I mean you can’t even flush tampons down the toilet without plugging the toilet, how the heck are you going to fluch a whole Koran down the toilet and expect it to go down? That would have made the plumbing book of World Records if that one worked.
Stephen M. St. Onge
Sorry Mr. Cole, but you’re still making a fool of yourself on this.
Question: Is there any statement in any of the documents released that says: ‘I saw a Koran flushed down a toilet?’ As far as I can tell, there isn’t.
Question: Is there any statement, in any of the documents, that says ‘So-and-so told me he saw a Koran flushed down a toilet?’ As far as I can tell, there isn’t.
What the documents say is that prisoners heard rumors of a Koran flushing. Given the Muslim penchant for believing in the ridiculous, e.g. The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, and given the fact that religious fanatics lie frequently (and were trained to, in this case), there was no reason for a rational human being to believe anything they said without substantial corroboration. Such corroboration did not exist.
But you believed it anyway. You were so eager to believe it, you took the word of terrorists that it must be true.
Should you ever write an essay on the theme of ‘Faced with a conflict between religious fanatics trained to lie and murder, and the word of my own government, I find the jihadists more credible because . . .’, we might all learn interesting things about your psychology. But there has never been any rational reason to believe the Koran-down-the-crapper story, and you were wrong to take it seriously.
Thus spaketh FatSteveathrusta.
Stephen M. St. Onge
Sorry Mr. Cole, but you’re still making a fool of yourself on this.
Question: Is there any statement in any of the documents released that says: ‘I saw a Koran flushed down a toilet?’ As far as I can tell, there isn’t.
Question: Is there any statement, in any of the documents, that says ‘So-and-so told me he saw a Koran flushed down a toilet?’ As far as I can tell, there isn’t.
What the documents say is that prisoners heard rumors of a Koran flushing. Given the Muslim penchant for believing in the ridiculous, e.g. The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, and given the fact that religious fanatics lie frequently (and were trained to, in this case), there was no reason for a rational human being to believe anything they said without substantial corroboration. Such corroboration did not exist.
But you believed it anyway. You were so eager to believe it, you took the word of terrorists that it must be true.
Should you ever write an essay on the theme of ‘Faced with a conflict between religious fanatics trained to lie and murder, and the word of my own government, I find the jihadists more credible because . . .’, we might all learn interesting things about your psychology. But there has never been any rational reason to believe the Koran-down-the-crapper story, and you were wrong to take it seriously.
Thus spaketh FatSteveathrusta.
Dave Lundberg
Exactly Stephen.
Mr. Cole you list who not to believe as if the list adds credence to your point when in reality they are all getting the information from the same sources or in the case of the supposed military ones …unnamed sources.
You’re not very smart are you?
But we sure can tell what you are a lefty.
Maybe instead of Amnestly I. looking into our prison they should jump the fence and go visit some of Castro’s. I’m sure they are much like country clubs.
I wait in earnest for the revolution that will rid our country of vermin like you.