Of course, irrational beliefs had nothing to do with this violence either. While I can't defend sloppy reporting, I also won't let religious zealots get a pass on this.

Come on people, "holy wars" almost declared because someone, somewhere, might have destroyed a book? Strike anyone just a wee bit 12th century? We might have problems with Kansas backpedaling to the 18th century, but if this is the cultural maturity we can expect from leaders of the Muslim world, I think we're all in trouble.

Even if the item was true--it's probably not--Newsweek or any idiot should have known that it would incite violence somewhere. Newsweek would probably say, like Nickboy, "We know stuff." Well, they don't know much about the Muslim World if they thought the toilet story was innocuous. Even if the toilet story were true, it's one episode of poor judgement by an interrogator. One episode does not a pattern make. Not worth reporting, given the obvious danger of doing so.

Let's see.

Where have we seen before news reports based on high-level U.S. governemnt sources who turned out to have inaccurate information that ultimately led to many, many deaths in the Middle East?

Oh yeah, "Saddam has WMD."

Good thing *that* didn't lead to any bad P.R. for the U.S.
/jc

Re: Slash at May 16, 2005 11:16 AM

Explosions, war, and imprisonment don't seem to offend those fundamental Muslims that we're at war with. They do it themselves whenever possible. Religious humiliation seems to bother them a lot more than getting killed. Me, I'd rather be humiliated, thank you.

Slash,

Delving into non-sequitur a bit early in the day, aren't we?

RBMN -- you're right. There's a difference of worldview, and if we don't understand their worldview, we're going to be outflanked by those who do.

Does anyone else see the connection between this and the Sepoy Mutiny (or the Indian Rebellion of 1857)? There were many causes of that event, but the spark was a rumor that touched a deep religious/cultural nerve.

Native-born troops under British command were issued a new rifle, the Pattern 1853 Enfield, which used a greased cartridge that needed to be cut by the soldier's teeth before loading. The rebel leaders fueled the rumor that the Brits made the grease from both pigs and cows so as to force the soldiers (both Hindu and Muslim) to violate their religious practices.

In the western world view, defilement is not such a big deal. In Muslim and Hindu cultures, it is a very big deal. I know that it seems primative to western sensibilities, but we're dealing with what is, not what we think should be.

While I was visiting in India -- living with ex-pats for several months (long enough to start following the local news) -- there were periodic reports of riots starting because of perceived offenses. In many cases, it was likely that those who started the rumors or fanned the flames stood to gain by the actions of the impassioned mob.

The British overcame the Sepoy Mutiny with brute force, but they certainly didn't win over any hearts and minds.

Sure, the Newsweek report hurts, but in the battle for hearts and minds in the Muslim world, we've set the groundwork for such rumors to appear credible.

In addition to the spark and the fuel, there are leaders who are willing to exploit the impassioned mob. These are who we need to target -- not the mob.

later,
Pete

Credit where credit is due: I relied on the following article to refresh my memory of certain details.
http://encyclopedia.lockergnome.com/s/b/Indian_Mutiny

The Sepoy Mutiny is a great parallel.

On a lesser scale, the fundamentalist boycott of Procter and Gamble during the '80s - because of an alleged statement about the "satanic" nature of the company logo by an exec on the "Donahue" show that was never remotely close to confirmed - is as close as I can think of to a western analogue.

Fortunately, Western fundies are pretty boring in comparison.

Mitch,

"Delving into non-sequitur a bit early in the day, aren't we?"

I don't think that word means what you think it means. But nevertheless, how about the fact that the story of Gitmo soldiers desecrating the Koran has been widely reported from various sources long before Newsweek quoted the Pentagon official (see below), and even the Newsweek source is only backing off which document contained the report, not the truth of the report itself.

But no reason that should stop your "Newsweek lied, people died" meme.

Anyway, here's just a quick sample of the myriad of corroborating reports:

The Miami Herald March 9, 2005:

"[R]ecently declassified court documents allege that, as far back as 2002, some of Guantanamo's staff cursed Allah, threw Korans into toilets, mocked prisoners during prayers and deliberately took away prisoners' pants knowing that Muslims can't pray unless covered."

The Miami Herald March 6, 2005:

"Captives at the Guantanamo Bay prison are alleging that guards kicked and stomped on Korans and cursed Allah, and that interrogators punished them by taking away their pants, knowing that would prevent them from praying.

Three Kuwaiti captives -- Fawzi al Odah, 27, Fouad al Rabiah, 45, and Khalid al Mutairi, 29 -- separately complained to their lawyer that military police threw their Korans into the toilet, according to the notes of Kristine Huskey, a Washington attorney.

Guards also mocked captives at prayer and censored Islamic books, the captives allege. And in one incident, they say, a prison barber cut a cross-shaped patch of hair on an inmate's head. Most of the complaints come from the recently declassified notes of defense lawyers' interviews with prisoners, which Guantanamo officials initially stamped ''secret.'' Under a federal court procedure for due-process appeals by about 100 inmates, portions are now being declassified."

Philadelphia Inquirer January 20, 2005:

"Some detainees complained of religious humiliation, saying guards had defaced their copies of the Koran and, in one case, had thrown it in a toilet, said Kristine Huskey, who interviewed clients late last month. Others said that pills were hidden in their food and that people came to their cells claiming to be their attorneys, to gain information. "All have been physically abused, and, however you define the term, the treatment of these men crossed the line," Wilner said."

Hartford Courant (Connecticut) January 16, 2005
Book review of GUANTANAMO: AMERICA'S WAR ON HUMAN RIGHTS by David Rose:

"In March, the government released five British men from Guantanamo after holding them nearly three years. They had been captured in Afghanistan, where they had gone to offer humanitarian aid. Rose interviewed them the same month, two months before allegations of abuse at Abu Ghraib in Iraq first surfaced, and they described captivity that seems eerily similar. They said they were punched, slapped, denied sleep, had seen other prisoners sexually humiliated, had been hooded, and were forced to watch copies of the Koran being flushed down toilets."

How's that for a non-sequitur?
/jc

All that corroboration, and yet Newsweek is backtracking:

http://reuters.myway.com/article/20050516/2005-05-16T002959Z_01_N15405868_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-RELIGION-AFGHAN-NEWSWEEK-DC.html

Wow. Are they nuts or what?

And no, Slash, non-sequitur means pretty much what I think. To wit:

Newsweek runs with flawed information which offended a pre-feudal society to the point of inciting riot.

while

The President went with flawed information (that every single world leader also went with), which led to the liberation of tens of millions of people.

Nope. No difference there.

For all the anger you hear from the administration you don't hear much in the way of denials that the desecrations were taking place. Instead there seem to be a lot of non-denial denials. It is par for the course that the thing this administration works hardest at is to shift the focus from their own incompetence.

For all the anger you hear from the administration you don't hear much in the way of denials that the desecrations were taking place. Instead there seem to be a lot of non-denial denials. It is par for the course that the thing this administration works hardest at is to shift the focus from their own incompetence.

Incidentally, Slash - the "corroboration" you cite above is entirely either former inmates (and remember that discrediting their captors by any means necessary has been terrorist SOP forever. Irish, Jewish, Palestinian, ETA, Red Brigade, Baader-Meinhof and Quaeda have all done the same thing) or a book that, with a Google search or three, seems to have been reviewed by very few (none) actual critics.

Not saying it's not there - just saying I'm seriously unconvinced. Not as unconvinced as I am with the thesis that your comparison of Newsweek's blunder and Bush's faulty intelligence is the same thing, but then there's no talking with you about that kinda thing anyway.

My bottom line on any of it is: "Who the HELL cares"? I'm a Baptist (fundamentalist bible-thumper...whatever you want to throw at me...) and I can only imagine the things that are done to the Bible around the world. It gives me a twinge to think about it, but I sure as hell would never riot and hurt other people due to RUMOURS of something happening...not only that, the Bible is not our God. The Bible is our guide...but in the end God will still be there Bible or not. We're suppose to get all torn up because something like this MAY have happened, but nevermind the dead on 9-11, nevermind the rape rooms and the mass graves and the killing that goes on probably this very minute. Where's the Muslim respect for other human life let alone other human faiths? Ask the Hindus how well it goes with the Muslims.

And yeah...ya think the former prisoners may just have an axe to grind and a few juicy stories to tell? Why do so many Americans WANT to believe the worst about their own country? People literally stream into this country-WHY?!

BTW, Mitch-your posting on the H'Mong was great.

I'm borrowing from a poster on Lucianne...he says it better (and shorter) than I did:

Reply 50 - Posted by: Douglas DC, 5/16/2005 7:45:02 PM

#35, when Arafat's boys occupied the Church of the Nativity,they used the Bibles for toilet paper.Yasser found out that the Word lives without paper-to his Eternal regret.....

Who the hell cares? I care. Why? Because I hope that we succeed in helping liberate a large chunk of the Muslim world.

Pete's rule #1: You will not change the minds of people you do not understand. This is why the Sunday morning demonstrators at Summit and Snelling have never changed anyone's mind. And why those letters from earnest Brits didn't sway Ohio voters.

Notice that the violence in response to the Newsweek article did not spread across the Muslim world, despite the generally accepted idea that the incident -- if it happened -- would have been deeply offensive to most (if not all) Muslims. Why, for instance, did this not precipitate significant anti-American protests in Iraq?

I'll bet you that most (if not all) of those who acted violently -- supposedly in response to the Newsweek article -- are not literate and don't know Newsweek from Us Weekly. And they didn't just act out of rage. There was somebody goading them at the local level. Actually, directing more than goading.

Think astroturf rather than grassroots.

The Newsweek story provided a useful excuse for certain local leaders to settle some scores and score some points. But it's not Newsweek that's pulling the strings.

And it's not Newsweek that provided the context in which these allegations have currency.

Peter -- How exactly do you act in a way that does not offend the local imans inciting these 'illiterate' people to violence? Shall we start stoning gays to demonstrate that we are sympatico? That local imam in Pakistan is going to hate us no matter what. We refuse to let Israel get pushed into the sea, they hate us. We (belatedly) help liberate the people of East Timor, they hate us. We (unilaterally, without any UN mandate) protect Muslims in Kosovo from genocide, they hate us. How exactly is 'understanding the people we are trying to convince' going to help??? The imams are funded and supported by tyrannical regimes who use them for their own political purposes. The only way to win the hearts and minds of 'The Muslim Street' is to show the youth that there is a better future for them under a democracy than the future their imams can provide.
Slash -- the fact that allegations are printed elsewhere does not let Newsweek off the hook in any way, shape or form. If you want to be a national, or even international, publication then you have a bigger responsibility to get things right... and the consequences of getting them wrong are greater. Would the magazine of Evan 'We're going to give Kerry/Edwards a "glow"/the MSM is worth 15 points for the Democrats' Thomas be likely to print a single-source story favorable to the administration?

Mitch,

All that Newsweek retracted is that the Pentagon internal investigation confirmed the reported incidents of Koran desecration. The multiply-sourced allegations that the desecrations took place have not beed retracted, and have been widely reproted for many months.

In any event, even if false, which false report lead to more deaths? That U.S. interegators desecrated the Koran or that Saddam had WMD?

I know, I know, any suggestion that the Bush Administration is guilty of the same thing you're objecting to, only on a far greater scale, is a "non-sequitur."

How about them Heat!
/jc

Chriss,

I agree. The way to change minds is to demonstrate that democracy and rule of law are better (and provide better opportunities) than warped theocracy and oppressive regimes.

As such, it behooves us to put the screws to the oppressive regimes and to conduct ourselves within the rule of law. I'm open to contradictory facts, but my assumption is that torture gets us lousy intelligence, and makes the "hearts and minds" work harder.

To answer a couple of your other comments:

From what I can tell, the Arab street doesn't give a rat's ass about what we do for non-Arab Muslims.

There is no way to avoid "offending" the imams. They take their talking points from folks who will use anything they can, and who care only for their political gains. Just like there's no way for the current President to act in a way that appeases the Snelling-Summit sign holders.

The Arab street loves conspiracy theories, which I take to be one of the symptoms of living under repressive regimes, though it might be an Arab thing. And we are stuck with a strong anti-American bias throughout this region. If we can avoid feeding the conspiracy theory machine, and if we can avoid creating bad PR for ourselves (the President talking about a crusade, dumb f**k prison guards taking photos), we make our job just a tiny bit easier.

It's interesting to note that repressive regimes do not necessarily generate anti-Americanism. The young people in Iran are more pro-American than the young people in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Explain that.

In bringing up the idea that all terrorists claim abuse at the hands of their captors, Mitch mentioned the IRA. Gee, they've been quiet lately. Wonder why. Did they get what they were wanting back in the 70s, 80s, and 90s? Have they been appeased? Have they been crushed? Did their funding dry up?