Oops, sorry we cause all those riots

[RandFan]

Re: Re: Oops, sorry we cause all those riots

More misdirection and misinformation from the right. The defense department had a number of chances to refute the story before it came out, but remained silent for some reason.

Are you saying the media has no responsibility if the government doesn't respond? I find that troublesome.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Honestly, I have no problem with this. If you riot because someone (supposedly) flushed your favorite story book down the toilet, then you deserve whatever happens to you.

 

[Tmy]

Yet another example of reckless journalism. Shame on Newsweek.


Heres a funnier example



Schwarzenegger 'Destroy The Moon' Quotes--A Hoax

A leading political commentator has apologized to Arnold Schwarzenegger after alleging the California Governor wanted to destroy the moon.
Former congressman Joe Scarborough claimed on TV last month the former movie star had jokingly suggested women would not suffer from pre-menstrual syndrome (PMS) if there was no moon.

Scarborough told viewers of MSNBC cable news network Schwarzenegger had said, "If we get rid of the moon, women, those menstrual cycles are governed by the moon, will not get PMS. They will stop bitching and whining."



HAHAHA what a dumbass!!!! And a bit of irony, since Scarborough was one of those who called for Rather to step down after that bogus Bush story came to light. The hypocrites are so entertaining.

 

[shecky]

Afghan Riots Not Tied to Report on Quran Handling, General Says

http://usinfo.state.gov/is/Archive/2005/May/13-299433.html

Washington – The chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff says a report from Afghanistan suggests that rioting in Jalalabad on May 11 was not necessarily connected to press reports that the Quran might have been desecrated in the presence of Muslim prisoners held in U.S. custody at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Air Force General Richard Myers told reporters at the Pentagon May 12 that he has been told that the Jalalabad, Afghanistan, rioting was related more to the ongoing political reconciliation process in Afghanistan than anything else.

Why does General Myers hate America?

 

[Brown]

A few points:

First, I took a look at the magazine in question. Had I not been told where to look, I would have missed it. There was no headline referring to toilets or books, and the substance of the story was that there were abuses going on down at Guantanamo. The report said that the book flushing had been reported to investigators, with the clear meaning that such conduct would not be honorable.

Second, prisoners have in fact reported that interrogators have dissed the prisoners' "holy book," and there are published reports (many of them not denied) that interrogators have belittled Islam and/or have used coercive tactics that try to use the prisoner's religious beliefs against him.

Third, so far the denials have largely been "non-denial denials," and that always rouses suspicion. Allegations of desecration are often called "unfounded" or "not credible" or other words that basically mean "the prisoner can't prove it." Also, a flat denial here doesn't really say much: of course the interrogators didn't flush the book down the crapper. Nobody can flush a book of average size down a normal crapper. Therefore, the story is patently false.

But... suppose an investigator put a Quran on top of a toilet, or threatened to flush a Quran down the toilet, or threw a Quran in the direction of a toilet, or threw a Quran into a toilet without flushing, or threw a Quran into a toilet and flushed, without actually flushing it "down the toilet," or tore a page from the Quran and threw it in the toilet, or ....

Anyway, it is certainly possible (and consistent with other stories) for interrogators to disrespect the Quran, perhaps by using a toilet in some fashion. It would not surprise me one bit if it were revealed that interrogators insulted the Quran and that a toilet was involved.

 

[shecky]

Aside from the fact that the article didn't cause riots, it certainly seems quite possible that there's been some dissin' of the Koran going on by the US in order to break detainees. Hell, if that's the worst that's been done to detainees, I'd say we're doing a pretty good job.

What is funny is all the right wingnuts with crocodile tears over the plight of rioting muslim fanatics. Which is what they'd be IF they were rioting because someone soiled a copy of the Koran somewhere.

 

[Baker]

I have to agree with BPSCG comment that this was bound to happen.
I found this article that envisages it.

Anti-American feelings are widespread in the Muslim world and extend to U.S. consumer brands, according to a report released Wednesday. It suggested the U.S. burnish its image with a change in tone and by publicizing aid programs.

The report, by Charney Research, is based on 14 focus groups conducted last December and January among college-educated men and women in Egypt, Morocco and Indonesia.

Anger at U.S. foreign policy and at the U.S. government dominated spontaneous reactions in all three countries.

Many young Muslims said they admired Osama bin Laden, while views of President Bush were uniformly negative. All focus group members rejected U.S. views of the war in Iraq, saying the United States invaded on a false premise to further its own regional goals.

Anti-Semitic stereotypes also were noted. Focus group members saw the United States and Israel as synonymous and estimated the proportion of Jews in the U.S. population at up to 85 percent; it is 2 percent.

The report found negative opinions of the United States are taking a toll on U.S. companies, and that amounts of U.S. aid were massively underestimated; not one person in any focus group knew the U.S. is the world's largest donor by dollar amount.

"Most Egyptians and Indonesians put U.S. support for their countries over 10 years in millions; the correct figures were $7.3 billion and $1 billion, respectively," the authors said.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050519/D8A613HO0.html

 

[shecky]

Of course it was bound to happen. Particularly since justifications for US aggressions against places like Iraq have grown tissue-paper thin. Newsweek's lack of credibility is surpassed by the US government's.

The Muslim world is rife with paranoia and conspiracy theories, has been for a long time. Is it really a surprise that the US is viewed negatively by many Muslims?

I've no doubt the Newsweek blurb fit in perfectly with the preconceptions of Muslims. Hell, it's perfectly consistent with the reports we've heard about detainee treatment. In this particular case, however, I think it wise to go back to General Richard Myers contention that the Newsweek article didn't cause the wave of rioting.

 

[Skeptic]

It seems to me that Islamic societies are behaving the same way battering husbands and bullies in general behave (which is not at all the same thing as saying that all, or most, individuals in those societies so behave). They are fine as long as you obey their every whim, but the moment you dare to "insult" or "belittle" them in any way, no matter how trivial or ill-informed, this is considered a perfect justification for irrational, random violence.

Of course, as with battering husbands, the rules do not apply to them. Battered wives are told by their husband that they must obey his every whim--but there is no corresponding responsibility from the husband to do anything at all for the wife. If anything, battering husbands who are pathologicaly jealous of their wife's "whoring" behavior for, say, going out for half a hour without telling them, are usually the same ones who have a couple of other girlfriends all over town.

Same here. Non-Islamic societies must be incredibly respectful and not insult Islamic sensibilities in any way, yet there isn't the slightest pressure on Islamic societies to respect western society's values. As the Pakistani foreign minister said: "the USA must think 100 times before insulting the sensibilities of Muslims". Oh yeah? And does this mean Pakistani society will think 100 times before burning churches? Dream on.

 

[kalen]

Newsweek articles don't kill people, riot police kill people!

Seriously, I agree with the "it was bound to happen" people in the sense that there have been so many reported instances of religious disrespect, it was bound to push people over the edge. Seems to me that they had enough of these kind of reports (and there have been more than a few).

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I think it wise to go back to General Richard Myers contention that the Newsweek article didn't cause the wave of rioting.

Correct. Stupid people caused the riots. Newsweek had nothing to do with it. We must hold the stupid accountable for their own actions.

 

[Mycroft]

Newsweek articles don't kill people, riot police kill people!

Seriously, I agree with the "it was bound to happen" people in the sense that there have been so many reported instances of religious disrespect, it was bound to push people over the edge. Seems to me that they had enough of these kind of reports (and there have been more than a few).

Emphasis mine.

The responsibility for rioting and killing lay with those who are rioting and killing. We need to recognize that these are the actions of extremists, and not pander to them by taking responsibility for provoking them. Civilized people do not declare jihad over offenses to inanimate objects.

 

[shecky]

Certainly, nobody was forced to riot. But the rioters were not instigated by the Newsweek blurb, accurate or not, according to Myers. Apparently, Afghanis have better issues to riot over already.

Personally, Koran abuse ranks pretty low on my meter outrageousness. Linking the blurb with the rioting seems a odd bit of news direction on the part of Scott McClelland and the various conservatives who took up the cause. McClelland seemed to ask Newsweek to make amends by pointing out what the policies and practices are in that part of the world. In other words, reopening old wounds. That's some bluff. You'd think the Administration would be satisfied to have abuse stories not be dredged up again.

 

[Skeptic]

Most people do not riot and kill based on a Newsweek blurb. The false report is Newsweek's fault; the subsequent rioting isn't.

If a husband beats his wife half to death because she served him boiled potatoes instead of fried ones, for example, is the real problem here the "instigation" of the incident by the wife? Is the real concern here to improve the wife's ability to obey her husband's whims more perfectly?

The enormous discrepancy between the insensate, random violence the Islamic world engages in for any real or percieved offence to its beliefs, and the total disregard and contempt it has for other people's belief, is the core of the "Jihad" problem.

 

[Moon-Spinner]

It is such a foreign world to me how anybody could get their shorts all bunched up over a book. If reports came that Muslims were burning copies of the Bible, I can't imagine even the nuttiest Christian fundies calling for rioting, death, etc.. More than likely they would just make statements such as "Oh well, they're all going to Hell anyway", and go on with their lives. The rest of the world would just laugh it off.

Of course, I'm sure their are a few extreme Christians that might get kooky over it, but not enough to cause any rioting.

 

[Mark]

Why is no one talking about the fact that the reason Newsweek ran the story is because they were given the "details" by someone in the Pentagon!!!!!!!!!

Rhetorical question, of course. The reason is that fact doesn't fit the myth of the"evil, liberal media."

 

[sackett]

Glug glug glug!

Funny thing is, you can flush those miniature Korans that some Muslims carry. These things are genuine books, but run up in microscopic print that's unreadable without a powerful lens, if then. They amount to talismans or jujus -- and man! but you'd better not disparage them! Even an educated Muslim will turn furious if you diss his little book.

I wonder how you'd break a recalcitrant prisoner by desecrating his holy writ? Seems to me you'd just harden him further. But the wonders of the military mind are not for me to fathom.

 

[kalen]

The responsibility for rioting and killing lay with those who are rioting and killing. We need to recognize that these are the actions of extremists, and not pander to them by taking responsibility for provoking them. Civilized people do not declare jihad over offenses to inanimate objects.

Your first sentence make perfect sense. I am not apologising for anybody, either. I'm just saying I'm not surprised. I've stopped being amazed at how poorly people tend to treat each other some time ago.

I'm not entirely clear with regard to your generalizations in the rest of your post. Some questions:

How about if they limited themselves to a "letter to the editor" to register their anger over an offense to an inanimate object. Would they be civilized then? Would still you call them extremists?

Maybe the notion that one would get angry at all about the desecration of an inanimate object make them uncivilized? Or extremist?

Would you care also to qualify your use of the word "jihad?" To me, at least, it seems like a little racist dig. An oversight, perhaps?

 

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by kalen
Maybe the notion that one would get angry at all about the desecration of an inanimate object make them uncivilized? Or extremist?

I thought I made it clear that I think killing people over this is what I consider extremist. Writing letters to the editor, protesting through diplomatic channels, or just getting angry without inciting violence or hurting anybody are all things I would consider to be perfectly acceptable and civilized.

Originally posted by kalen
Would you care also to qualify your use of the word "jihad?" To me, at least, it seems like a little racist dig. An oversight, perhaps?

No oversight. There have been reports of extremists clerics in Afghanistan threatening to declare Jihad against the US unless the perpetuators of this "dessecration" were brought to them.

Edited to add:

A quick check with Google news produces:

Afghan clerics delay jihad call against US

FAIZABAD: A group of Afghan Islamic clerics have deferred a call for holy war against the United States over a magazine report that U.S interrogators desecrated the Quran after the report was retracted.

The clerics in Badakhshan province said on Sunday the United States should hand anyone guilty of desecrating the holy book to a Muslim country for prosecution in three days or they would declare jihad, or holy war, against the United States.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_19-5-2005_pg4_22

 

[kalen]

I thought I made it clear that I think killing people over this is what I consider extremist.

I don't know where you draw the line, but I think killing anyone for any reason is extreme.

Writing letters to the editor, protesting through diplomatic channels, or just getting angry without inciting violence or hurting anybody are all things I would consider to be perfectly acceptable and civilized.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if everybody was like that. Leading by that example would seem to be the civilized thing to do, too. Unfortunately, every new report of abuse(s) of detainees undermines that position. Indeed, the very invasion of Iraq (an American style "jihad", perhaps?), to me, eliminates any claim of civility for the US administration.

No oversight. There have been reports of extremists clerics in Afghanistan threatening to declare Jihad against the US unless the perpetuators of this "dessecration" were brought to them.

Just one more added to the top of the heap of Jihad declarations. What I was really hoping for was a realization that you were, in a way, picking on Muslims. I would have thought "Civilized people do not declare any sort of violence over offenses to inanimate objects" sounded a little bit better. I know that we are talking about the desecration of the Koran here, but still.....

Mycroft, I do think I know what you are saying. And I agree with it. I just have this urgent need to make it known that if we expect that somebody behaves in a particular way, we have to expect it from everybody including ourselves - otherwise our credibility is shot. And at some level it already is with the invasion of Iraq under flimsy pretenses and the many reports of abuse and torture.

I don't know which situation would surprise me the most: the extremist jihadists going non-violent, or the US stopping the "War on Terror(TM)."