"Newsweek Lied, People Died"

Cox & Forkum have a plethora of links to this story, including this afternoon's news from CNN that Newsweek has retracted the original charge:

Newsweek magazine issued a retraction Monday of a May 9 report on the alleged desecration of the Quran at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The White House earlier in the day expressed puzzlement over why Newsweek did not fully retract the story in its current issue, released Sunday.

And these comments from the Blogmeister:

Two points: (1) If they had wrongly reported the race of a criminal and produced a lynching, they'd feel much worse -- which is why they generally don't report such things, a degree of sensitivity they don't extend to reporting on, you know, minor topics like wars; and (2) If a blogger had made a similar mistake, with similar consequences, we'd be hearing about Big Media's superior fact-checking and layers of editors.

People died, and U.S. military and diplomatic efforts were damaged, because -- let's be clear here -- Newsweek was too anxious to get out a story that would make the Bush Administration and the military look bad.

And finally, Michelle Malkin, who also used the "Newsweek lied, people died" line with this qualifier:

Didn't think I needed to s-p-e-l-l i-t o-u-t, but some readers asked for clarification. Newsweek was reckless and sloppy and wrong. But I do not think the magazine "lied." Just thought it a very appropriate moment to do a boomerang on the moonbats' most dishonest and annoying meme.

I have no proof that Newsweek has lied either.  But Michelle's idea of taking a page out of the moonbat playbook ought to allow me to make the charge without substantiation. 

UPDATE: Speaking of playbooks, LGF has interesting information about the contents of an Al Qaeda Training Manual:

IF AN INDICTMENT IS ISSUED AND THE TRIAL, BEGINS, THE BROTHER HAS TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE FOLLOWING:

1. At the beginning of the trial, once more the brothers must insist on proving that torture was inflicted on them by State Security [investigators] before the judge.

2. Complain [to the court] of mistreatment while in prison.

3. Make arrangements for the brother’s defense with the attorney, whether he was retained by the brother’s family or court-appointed.

4. The brother has to do his best to know the names of the state security officers, who participated in his torture and mention their names to the judge. [These names may be obtained from brothers who had to deal with those officers in previous cases.]

5. Some brothers may tell and may be lured by the state security investigators to testify against the brothers [i.e. affirmation witness], either by not keeping them together in the same prison during the trials, or by letting them talk to the media. In this case,they have to be treated gently, and should be offered good advice, good treatment, and pray that God may guide them.

6. During the trial, the court has to be notified of any mistreatment of the brothers inside the prison.

If Newsweek wasn't willingly duped, then I'll guarantee you that many a moonbat has...

And many will again...

Guaranteed.

It's what makes a moonbat...

MORE: Scott Ott, has only he can, comments:

Newsweek Told Koran Flush Story Was 'Slam Dunk'
by Scott Ott

(2005-05-16) -- An unnamed former top government official told a Newsweek magazine reporter that his story, about a U.S. military guard at Guantanamo prison flushing a Koran down a toilet, was "a slam dunk," according to the latest apology from Newsweek editor Mark Whitaker.

The magazine's uncorroborated, single-source, hearsay report of the Koran desecration sparked riots in several Muslim countries, killing at least 15 and injuring perhaps 100.

While the magazine has apologized publicly to the riot victims and their families, Mr. Whitaker told the New York Times, "We're not retracting anything. We don't know what the ultimate facts are."

For those unschooled in professional journalistic ethics, Mr. Whitaker explained that a retraction demands a higher standard of evidence than an ordinary news item.

"You don't just rush to press with a retraction until you nail down the facts," he added.

Newsweek reporter Michael Isikoff said his anonymous source is now unsure where he got the Koran-flushing information, which was broadcast across the Arab world by Al-Jazeera and others.

"If there's a bright side to this story," said Mr. Whitaker. "At least our anonymous sources are safe, unharmed. And of course, our advertisers now know that Newsweek has great credibility in the Arab world, despite the bad feelings that Muslims have about America in general."

In an effort to help in the grieving process, the magazine's publisher said that immediate family members of the dead would receive a free 90-day trial subscription to Newsweek.

"If they're done grieving after 90 days, they can write 'cancel' on the invoice and pay nothing," he said. "Otherwise we'll just bill their credit cards in three easy installments at a substantial savings off the newstand price."

Comments

[chuckels]

Quote from above:

"For those unschooled in professional journalistic ethics, Mr. Whitaker explained that a retraction demands a higher standard of evidence than an ordinary news item. 'You don't just rush to press with a retraction until you nail down the facts,' he added."

Absolutely incredible!!! More of the same old, "It's not the accuracy of the charge but rather the severity of the charge that matters."

Now I guess we can say of Newsweek what we now say of CBS...Oh, they reported such and such today...I wonder if that is true?

Not chuckling on this one!

chuckels