It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

This is why unchecked anti-american rhetoric is dangerous

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2005 @ 07:06 AM
link   
edition.cnn.com...

Some genius from newsweek put an article in paper about some half ass truth/fiction, typical spin, that has now cost lives and will probably cost more. I have said it before that anti-american rhetoric is dangerous, especially when they cant get their facts straight. Now newsweek has made an international ass of themselves and have probably started a 'holy war'. This threatens to derail any progress made in afghanistan.:shk:.




posted on May, 16 2005 @ 07:22 AM
link   
Actually, the base of the issue both for NewsWeek as well as CBS, is that they need to substantiate their facts first before running with a story. In today's world, the media is out to sensationalize any story so that their ratings readership goes up.
All the US news sources are at fault on this issue and they need to be held cupable for any and all damages that their false stories may cause.
Our news sources now are more like the rags that you find at the checkout rather than true sources of un-biased news



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 07:27 AM
link   
What about the Downing Street memo and the obvious fact that no WMD or Al Qaeda ties were found in Iraq? Or the torture and mysterious deaths of several prisoners at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo? Or the total destruction of Fallujah? Or that last week a prosecuting attorney for the U.S. military showed evidence to a Navy judge during a trial over a soldier who refuses to fight in Iraq that the Afghanistan and Iraq wars are illegal? Such information isn't anti-american rhetoric, its the truth, yet I'm sure its creating some of the violence in the regions the U.S. military is occupying.

I honestly do not think the U.S. media could do much to incite more violence than the U.S. government and military is doing on its own. Even without all the other wrongdoing that is getting out in the press these days, "collateral damage" and the simple fact of being occupied by a foreign power is enough to get people mad enough to kill indefinitely.

[edit on 16-5-2005 by Frith]



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 07:31 AM
link   
Would be interesting to see some sort of media requirment type thing they have to meet before they are legaly alowed to run such stories, such as some type of check list, which requires certain criteria, before they are alowed to run the story.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 07:48 AM
link   
Dear all,

It makes me chuckle when I read the whining complaints of the right-wing echo chamber complaining about innaccurate articles on US TV and in US magazines.

Those on the right seem to have conveniently forgotten the lies told by Colin Powell at the UN, the lies told by George W every time he talked about Iraq in the run-up to the war, the lies told by Cheney almost everytime he opens his mouth, the lies told by..... (do you see where I am going with this?)

Here is a word you should learn - HYPOCRITE

You are all one.

Cheers

BHR



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by BillHicksRules
It makes me chuckle when I read the whining complaints
of the right-wing echo chamber

Is it just the alleged 'right wing echo chamber' that makes
you chuckle, or is it all echo chambers?

Take a look sometime at the Democratic Underground
echo-chamber. My gawd .... the 'whining complaints' hypocrites
in that echo-chamber (that wrote the book on how to be an
echo-chamber) is full of those on the far left. That place makes
all sane people chuckle. www.democraticunderground.com...

Hypocritical whining complainers can be found anywhere
and in any political party.

However, complaining about Newsweek and it's ignorance in
writing a story that wasn't true, and inflaming idiot extremists
in the muslim world, is very much something that is worth
complaining about. It's not hypocracy. It's just calling it like it is.
BAD journalism. Irresponsible. A waste of money and the trees
it took to print the garbage.

[edit on 5/16/2005 by FlyersFan]



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by BillHicksRules
Dear all,

It makes me chuckle when I read the whining complaints of the right-wing echo chamber complaining about innaccurate articles on US TV and in US magazines.

Those on the right seem to have conveniently forgotten the lies told by Colin Powell at the UN, the lies told by George W every time he talked about Iraq in the run-up to the war, the lies told by Cheney almost everytime he opens his mouth, the lies told by..... (do you see where I am going with this?)

Here is a word you should learn - HYPOCRITE

You are all one.

Cheers

BHR


This has what to do with left vs right?



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 07:58 AM
link   
Dont turn this into a "well, bush lied to us" argument. I am not even discussing that. I am saying that anti-american lies put in newsweek has and will continue to cost lives. I am saying that the US news media has a responsibility to get that facts. If they dont maybe there should be government controls on media.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 08:08 AM
link   
Trust/Cole,

You cannot view this incident in isolation, no matter how much you would like to.

The Bush admihistration lied. That is a fact no matter how much you dispute it.

These lies led to war and that war has lead to tens of thousands of deaths.

Did Newsweek/CBS get it wrong, yes they did, but in the grand scale of things it is inconsequntial compared to the effects of the lies of the Bush Administration and the right wing apologists for it.

Cheers

BHR



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 08:17 AM
link   
They may not have even been wrong about the desecration.
There are many other article in which this has been brought up.



www.antiwar.com...

Contrary to White House spin, the allegations of religious desecration at Guantanamo published by Newsweek on May 9, 2005, are common among ex-prisoners and have been widely reported outside the United States. Several former detainees at the Guantanamo and Bagram prisons have reported instances of their handlers sitting or standing on the Koran, throwing or kicking it in toilets, and urinating on it. Prior to the Newsweek article, the New York Times reported a Guantanamo insider asserting that the commander of the facility was compelled by prisoner protests to address the problem and issue an apology.

One such incident (during which the Koran was allegedly thrown in a pile and stepped on) prompted a hunger strike among Guantanamo detainees in March 2002. Regarding this, the New York Times in a May 1, 2005, article interviewed a former detainee, Nasser Nijer Naser al-Mutairi, who said the protest ended with a senior officer delivering an apology to the entire camp. And the Times reports: "A former interrogator at Guantanamo, in an interview with the Times, confirmed the accounts of the hunger strikes, including the public expression of regret over the treatment of the Korans." (Neil A. Lewis and Eric Schmitt, "Inquiry Finds Abuses at Guantanamo Bay," New York Times, May 1, 2005.)



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 08:21 AM
link   
Again BHR what does this have to do with left vs right or even the bush admin? this is about the MEDIA

Both sides of the media are equaly morons, bias is one thing but reporting things such as this with slim speculation only stirs up trouble.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by AceOfBase
They may not have even been wrong about the desecration.
There are many other article in which this has been brought up.



www.antiwar.com...

Contrary to White House spin, the allegations of religious desecration at Guantanamo published by Newsweek on May 9, 2005, are common among ex-prisoners and have been widely reported outside the United States. Several former detainees at the Guantanamo and Bagram prisons have reported instances of their handlers sitting or standing on the Koran, throwing or kicking it in toilets, and urinating on it. Prior to the Newsweek article, the New York Times reported a Guantanamo insider asserting that the commander of the facility was compelled by prisoner protests to address the problem and issue an apology.

One such incident (during which the Koran was allegedly thrown in a pile and stepped on) prompted a hunger strike among Guantanamo detainees in March 2002. Regarding this, the New York Times in a May 1, 2005, article interviewed a former detainee, Nasser Nijer Naser al-Mutairi, who said the protest ended with a senior officer delivering an apology to the entire camp. And the Times reports: "A former interrogator at Guantanamo, in an interview with the Times, confirmed the accounts of the hunger strikes, including the public expression of regret over the treatment of the Korans." (Neil A. Lewis and Eric Schmitt, "Inquiry Finds Abuses at Guantanamo Bay," New York Times, May 1, 2005.)


Well all I can say is...if these folks are indeed potential terrorist, then whats the beef.....did Martha Stewart get to cook her favorite dish in jail? If these folks are really spirtual, then the Quran is etched upon their hearts...not in a book! Look at John Mc Cain...do you think he got to read the bible, before every vietnamese induced beating he received? What a bunch or terrorist wimps!



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by AceOfBase
They may not have even been wrong about the desecration.
There are many other article in which this has been brought up.



www.antiwar.com...

Contrary to White House spin, the allegations of religious desecration at Guantanamo published by Newsweek on May 9, 2005, are common among ex-prisoners and have been widely reported outside the United States. Several former detainees at the Guantanamo and Bagram prisons have reported instances of their handlers sitting or standing on the Koran, throwing or kicking it in toilets, and urinating on it. Prior to the Newsweek article, the New York Times reported a Guantanamo insider asserting that the commander of the facility was compelled by prisoner protests to address the problem and issue an apology.

One such incident (during which the Koran was allegedly thrown in a pile and stepped on) prompted a hunger strike among Guantanamo detainees in March 2002. Regarding this, the New York Times in a May 1, 2005, article interviewed a former detainee, Nasser Nijer Naser al-Mutairi, who said the protest ended with a senior officer delivering an apology to the entire camp. And the Times reports: "A former interrogator at Guantanamo, in an interview with the Times, confirmed the accounts of the hunger strikes, including the public expression of regret over the treatment of the Korans." (Neil A. Lewis and Eric Schmitt, "Inquiry Finds Abuses at Guantanamo Bay," New York Times, May 1, 2005.)


well gee, if they had not been wrong, why did they admit they are wrong?



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 11:53 AM
link   
They didn't, they simply admitted they had insufficient corroboration & confirmation...



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Actualy, NewsWeek has the following to say:



Last Friday, a top Pentagon spokesman told us that a review of the probe cited in our story showed that it was never meant to look into charges of Qur'an desecration. The spokesman also said the Pentagon had investigated other desecration charges by detainees and found them "not credible." Our original source later said he couldn't be certain about reading of the alleged Qur'an incident in the report we cited, and said it might have been in other investigative documents or drafts. Top administration officials have promised to continue looking into the charges, and so will we. But we regret that we got any part of our story wrong, and extend our sympathies to victims of the violence and to the U.S. soldiers caught in its midst.

Their attempt to authenticate the information was the questioning of 2 US goverment officials. 1 Refused to respond, the second only spoke on other items in the report. The second DID NOT address the Koran desecration issue. The NewsWeek reports assumed that this was an admission and then ran with the story.
NewsWeek's Editor's Desk
The only other "source" is Marc Falkoff a lawyer out of New York that is representing 21 of the detainees.
Marc Falkoff
Also as stated by both Newsweek as well as the Herald Tribune International
The allegations by the detainees, have been found to be without merit or as noted above:



The spokesman also said the Pentagon had investigated other desecration charges by detainees and found them "not credible."


[edit on 16-5-2005 by kenshiro2012]



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 12:12 PM
link   

have said it before that anti-american rhetoric is dangerous

Lets get somethign straight here. Newsweek reported that a government official had told them that he read an official report wherein it was noted that parts of the koran were flushed down the toilet. Now the 'apology' isn't that it was untrue, the source is still stating that he read such a report, but there is a question of whether or not it was a gitmo official report of some other agency's report.

How is the reporting of factual matters anti-american??? Please explain how Newsweeks report is anti-american? Becuase it made american look bad? That simply does not cut it. Simply because someone says something about america and you don't like the results of it does not make it anti-american.

I'd just like to note here that it would be absurd that muslims would riot over this report, if it weren't for the fact that people have died as a result of it. It'd've been even more absurd (but for the seriousness that results from death) if one considers that this has resulted in more anger than abu garaib.

Who cares about the koran being flushed down the toilet?



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Well, Their facts got spliced in with some lies and printed in neewsweek.

Who cares about the koran? apparently the muslims care about it dont they? and when people start getting killed maybe you will caring.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Trustnone
Dont turn this into a "well, bush lied to us" argument. I am not even discussing that. I am saying that anti-american lies put in newsweek has and will continue to cost lives. I am saying that the US news media has a responsibility to get that facts. If they dont maybe there should be government controls on media.


What? You can not be serious? Let me familliarize you with our first amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the PRESS; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

You see there should not be government controls on media, as we are "guaranteed" freedom of the press. I have a question though. Why is it that you are infuriated over a magazine "lying" (which they did not) yet you have no problem when lying leads to war, and death of fellow countrymen?

If one has an attention span longer than a gnat, then one might remember how the US government denied the allegations of widespread prisoner abuse at Abu-Ghraib until the photos came out. The US government would deny the desecration of the Koran till their dying breath, and unless someone has a photo with a page swirling down the crapper, they will continue to do so.

Freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and right to peacefully assemble are the very foundations on which this country was supposed to be built. Why else do you think it is the FIRST amendment? Because it is considered a priority for a democracy, that's why!

What is dangerous is the fact that more and more Americans think like you. This climate of fear has driven people to such extremes that it is threatening our very democracy.To quote a founding father......

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
- Benjamin Franklin, motto to Historical Review of Pennsylvania

IMHO-There are a few here that this can and does apply to. What is really scary , is the thought of all these children growing up in America who feel similar to you, due to this climate of fear, and pseudo patriotism. I find it hilarious how we are "spreading democracy" the world over, yet slowly losing ours here at home...........Ahhh the circle of life


[edit on 16-5-2005 by phoenixhasrisin]



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 02:35 PM
link   
The obvious truth is that whether the story is or was true or not the US's total disregard for the rule of law, human rights and religious / cultural norms that don't fit with their own means that people find it only too easy to believe it.

Chance are a Koran was flushed - they've broken every other cultural taboo why not this one?



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 02:37 PM
link   


How is the reporting of factual matters anti-american???


You must have been sleeping for the past five years


Reporting or saying anything that portrays American policy or policy makers in a less than hagiographic manner is now considered "anti-American."

Reporting unpleasant facts == anti-American.
Criticizing administration policy == anti-American.
Opposing futile wars == anti-American and probably treasonous.
Opposing George Bush == anti-American.

And so on, and so on.
"Anti-American" is just a phrase rightwingers use when they run out of arguments. It's a psywar tactic to try and shut people up, that's all.







 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join