Oregonian Slams Military While Protecting Newsweek
Copied from the Oregonian...in its entirety...
"If only Newsweek were to blame
Wednesday, May 18, 2005
On Tuesday, another U.S. soldier was sentenced in military court for abusing and humiliating Muslim detainees in Iraq. The punishment got drowned out by the White House's loud condemnation of Newsweek magazine for a retracted news brief about desecration of the Quran by interrogators at the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
There's no question Newsweek damaged its credibility and worsened global disgust with the United States by publishing such a poorly sourced news item. But it isn't true, as White House spokesman Scott McClellan said at a briefing Tuesday, that "there is lasting damage to (the nation's) image because of this report."
The lasting damage to the nation's image has come from years of reports of prisoner abuse in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo, some unsubstantiated and some chillingly documented. A few of the incidents involved the reservist found guilty this week of abusing detainees at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.
Despite such incidents, the White House seems offended that anyone might suspect further problems.
Newsweek's report of Quran abuse may have inflamed deadly riots in the Muslim world, though accounts differ on the riots' causes. Ironically, Newsweek may be proven right: A Pentagon spokesman said in a briefing Tuesday that there may have been "inadvertent mishandlings of the Quran." As Abu Ghraib showed, anything is possible.
And there is plenty of blame to go around."
So, the Oregonian defends Newsweek...not by offering some illumination of new information. Nor by making an argument wrapped around some interpretation of journalistic standards, but it takes the opportunity to kick the US military in the face, even while the military is in the process of disciplining those involved in prisoner abuse.
Where is the Oregonian's cry for the press to handle the Newsweek affair in the public, as the military is? Where is the call for justice, since unlike the prisoner abuse scandals where only humiliation was involved, for the dead in the riots following the publishing of the story? Where is Newsweek as an institution publicly outlining its courses of action to prevent further journalistic abuses? AWOL. Yet the highly regarded Oregonian can only deflect criticism directed at one of its sororital organizations by bashing those who defend their right to print.
So, the Bush White House, and the military are to blame for every ounce of hate in this world? And stirring the pot with false stories is a practice that is justified, because they are not responsible for the origin of the hate? C'mon...take responsibility for your sub-standard journalism, its consequences, and the necessary corrective action. Don't use the ..."he did worse" defense...it is not acceptable.
The Oregonian exaggerates with "years of reports prisoner abuse," when it was pretty well documented that the abuses took place over a relatively short period of time, by a relatively small group. And then compounds the effect by adding ..."some unsubstantiated, and some chillingly documented." Again, the Oregonian has left the hint of of cover-up, where none is proven to exist. I guess assassination by innuendo is an acceptable journalistic tool. And there is very little that is "chilling" about the prisoner abuse. While certainly humiliating, and somewhat physical in nature, it is a 1 on the Saddam scale of "chilling" prisoner abuse, torture, and murder. The Oregonian has intentionally skewed the perspective on this one as well.
Why do those in the military HATE the press...kind of hard to figure, eh? I guess it could be the continuous demeaning of the military's efforts and results by the press. It could be because the military dies defending the rights of those who cannot hold themselves to their own lowly standards. And most likely, because we have little respect for their product...a product that has proven itself to be standardless, often fabricated, and nearly always negative.
9 comments:
Catch the O'Reilly show No Spin Zone, he lists a number of editorials across the country (including the Oregonian) who published the same nonsense.
Nice catch,
Cheryl
Well, just count in the MSM showing this in the World's face ad nasuem, to try to justify their flawed logic. In the long haul, it will settle out, but in the menatime, we just have to be irritated...
Thanks for catching this article...
oops...shoving...:)
Lex. I reference the Oregonian's own words "abusing and humiliating." Additonally, of those currently being taken to task for their actions, none are accused of manslaughter, murder, or any other such crimes. All other alleged abuses are investigated by the military...which is a much greater search for accountability than the MSM can claim.
Howard Fineman was accurate in his assessment that today's MSM is a radical Left-wing political party aborn in the wake of the Viet-Nam War & Watergate, but unfortunately for it due to both a changed political climate and a changed communications environment, the MSMPP unable to adapt to changed circumstances is dying before our eyes.
lex: "... but already has "exonerated" those at the top whose orders made these violations of the UCMJ, U.S. law and international law possible."
Were the orders by "those at the top" investigated and found not to violate UCMJ, US law and international law? If so, I'm not sure why you "scare quote" exonerated. Do you, as a journalist, think the military or government were lying?
Made these violations ... possible? What kind of cause-effect argument is that?
"But let's keep our eye on the ball here."
If the "ball" is "to call out even those whose service we so greatly appreciate, when their behavior flies in the face of the law and the principles on which this country was founded."
How does the Newsweek report or the Oregonian article further the ball?
Can press behavior fly in the face of law and the principles on which this country was founded? Is that even remotely possible? And if it is, are you trying to take our focus off the ball of press accountability?
When Terry Moran says, "There is, Hugh, I agree with you, a deep anti-military bias in the media. One that begins from the premise that the military must be lying, and that American projection of power around the world must be wrong. I think that that is a hangover from Vietnam, and I think it's very dangerous.", is he taking his eye of the ball?
lex,
go investigate the 39 deaths in the california penal system listed as "homicide" from 2003.
i've always wondered about that statement the media makes, "we love OUR country".
speaking for myself, i love THIS country.
do you speak as you do because you love the country that this one will be after you destroy it?
kind of like O.J. loving Nicole.
ed,
well said.
mm,
love your site man.
Besides the immediate fallout from the Newsweek article (riots and death), remember the secondary damage to the military.
As someone who has served in the the military for some time, and who recently served in the Middle East, and who has started a blog trying to challenge the media liberal bias (www.rightinraleigh.blogspot.com) I can tell you that stories like this cost the military thousands of hours because we are forced to investigate every story. So we form commissions and distract our fighters by pulling them out of their units for questioning or taking their time inspecting.
There is a real cost.
"On Tuesday, another U.S. soldier was sentenced in military court for abusing and humiliating Muslim detainees in Iraq"
Somehow I think this should read
On Tuesday, another of Sgt Graners coworkers, was sentenced in military court for his involvement in the Sado-masochistic birthday party held by Sgt Graner in Lyndie England's honor. Sgt Graner is currently serving a 10 year prison term.
Unfortunately, the way the story is written, it would appear that a different set of problems occurred, not that the drum is being beaten yet again on the same cellblock, involving the same set of guards.
Post a Comment