Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: redmenace on May 16, 2005, 02:41:21 am
-
http://reuters.myway.com/article/20050516/2005-05-16T002959Z_01_N15405868_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-RELIGION-AFGHAN-NEWSWEEK-DC.html
And the inherent bias of the Washington Post owned Newsweek is made ever more clear. What a bunch of flamming jackasses.
-
Still, it's not like they told them to go on a violent rampage is it? I'd blame the ones in the riots more than I would the ones on the newspaper staff.
The world'd be a lot better off without people who took there religion so bloody seriously.
-
No, but when you know how fragile things are you ought think hey, maybe I shouldn't print that unless I know for sure that this is 100% provable. The media has all this power and influence, but they are hardly responcible in what they print and how they use their influence. I DO NOT promote censor of the press, just responcibility.
-
Or how about: "maybe people shouldn't be so bloody fragile".
People died, and I don't support that. However, I also don't support political correctness to appease the unwashed masses of morons. In this case, the reason they died is because a bunch of halfwits have decided to put their religious sensibilities above human life, and that's ridiculous.
-
How about: we printed a story which got a lot of Muslims really, really, really pissed off, so now we're going to backtrack and pretend it was all a mistake.
Isn't it a bit convenient that they are correcting themselves like a week late, and in the midst of a minor scandal over the desecration of the Koran?
How about a little skepticism and healthy sense of doubt, guys.
-
Really... it doesn't matter who was right or wrong in terms of the article (it's pretty ambigious anyways, if you look at the last sentence; the source 'corrected' themselves after the riots....). Ultimately, people shouldn't riot over this sort of thing; it's just not productive, and I'd expect the people who were killed are more likely to be Muslims than any other religion.
-
The (not so) funny thing is, the exact same thing will probably happen next week.
Both on and off topic:
I'm a bit of an introvert in that I often observe situations at the same time as I participate in things. I love to analyse things and decipher meanings, causes, or reactions.
My point is here we are observing and discussing these matters every week, but for what reason? To voice our own opinion to a group of people we'll probably never meet?
The truth is when I look at myself I think that while I usually condemn observed wrongfull actions etc, I've never really taken any action myself. I'm merely a disgruntlled observer spending my time with a beloved internet gaming community.
With this in mind, I procrastinate around the idea that inaction is actually worse than action. Yet wrongfull action could be classed as much worse than doing nothing. However if there was more people who observed and made the right action, I wonder would there be as many wrong actions around...?
[end rant / philosophical]
-
Those that riot were looking for a reason to have a riot.
I am advocating a little forthought and to be careful before running with something explosive.
-
'On Sunday, Afghan Muslim clerics threatened to call for a holy war against the United States.
"We regret that we got any part of our story wrong" '
:ha:
-
Ha! No Deepthroat this time, WP? :p
-
Erm, aren't they already in a holy war with the US?
-
Originally posted by redmenace
Those that riot were looking for a reason to have a riot.
I am advocating a little forthought and to be careful before running with something explosive.
Well.... firstly, the media has to report the news; lots of 'explosive' stuff happens, and you can't just ignore it for risk of offence.
Secondly... I'm not sure how good or bad the editorial process for checking that story was. But what stands out is that their source retracted what he said after it had already been published, so I'm not sure it's fair to lay the blame entirely in that direction. specifically the last couple of paragraphs make it sound more than a black-and-white issue of fault;
[q]Newsweek's Whitaker said that when the magazine first heard of the Koran allegation from its source, staff approached two Defense Department officials. One declined to comment, while the other challenged a different aspect of the May 9 story but did not dispute the Koran charge.
The magazine said other news organizations had already aired charges of Koran desecration based "only on the testimony of detainees."
"We believed our story was newsworthy because a U.S. official said government investigators turned up this evidence. So we published the item," Whitaker said.
"Our original source later said he couldn't be certain about reading of the alleged Koran incident in the report we cited," he wrote. [/q]
One side, of course, is that maybe they shouldn't have published it until they'd got confirmation... but the side issue in that is firstly the fear of being 'scooped', and also that the government would arrange a controlled leak to pre-defuse the situation, thus reducing its effectiveness as a news article.
The question possibly is, do you trust the government to release news-worthy but damaging (to them) information?
-
C'mon everybody, this is the US Government we're talking about here, if you've been paying attention to what's been going on in the past few years, then it's about as obvious as an NBA Player at a Vertically Challanged Convention that the Koran was bloody desecrated, along with all the torture, maltreatment, and other crimes against humanity that have been committed in Guantanamo Bay and places like it. Let's face it, a Holy War against the West is inevitable if the US Government and Media continue to act completely up themselves, it's just a matter of time, and the first casualties have already been made apparent...Truth and Justice...
I've just noticed that some people have actively condemned not the United States Government or Media, but those who took part in the riots...now c'mon, that is just plain wrong in every sense of the word! Just to put things in perspective; think about an object you hold very dear to you, it could be a family airlume say, or a gift from a loved one, it could be anything, anything that you personally hold so very dear to your heart that you wouldn't give it away for the World. Now, imagine someone you didn't even know just came into your house, took that object off you, and flushed it down the damn toilet, destroying it. That is just a taste of what Muslims would feel, indeed...
Muslims...consider the Koran the literal word of God and treat each book with deep reverence.
...now, Muslims are deeply religeous, you can be put to death for desecrating the Koran in some countries, and yet you seem to query their motives behind rioting when some Western ***hole flushes their Holy book down a Prison toilet in a vain attempt to break someone they're psycologically torturing?!? So before you start spouting coldly that their actions were 'counter-productive' or accuse Muslims of being 'Half-Witts', look in a damn mirror and ask yourself, "What would i think if the roles were reversed?"
-
According to the news, 14 (IIRC) are dead in riots because of this...
-
I was about to quote that same passage, and say the same thing.
The newspaper is not responsable, it was the source who retracted his statement. Seems to me this "government official" received orders to go back on his word, to save the govt. from public international embarassment.
We all know similar stuff happens at GITMO all the time. If they want to disprove this story, then let the media interview the detainees and the soldiers.
In a word, this is all spindoctoring at work. They looked bad, so they tried to deny and turn the situation around. Nothing that they haven´t done before.
-
The media is also responcible for the sources that they use as well. Just because they used a source that later retracted his information doesn't mean they don't share in the blame.
It seems to me that they are over eager to get a story out before anyone else. You would figure they would be careful after what happened to Dan Rather.
-
Originally posted by redmenace
The media is also responcible for the sources that they use as well. Just because they used a source that later retracted his information doesn't mean they don't share in the blame.
It seems to me that they are over eager to get a story out before anyone else. You would figure they would be careful after what happened to Dan Rather.
Well, if they assumed their sources never told the truth, they'd never publish anything..... if this was a credible source, they'd be inclined to trust him/her. If they had good reason to trust the source, and did enough checking to beleive the story (and the lack of denial from the DoD can be part of that), then it's scarcely their fault if the sources turns round and changes their story....
If the police base a case around a witness who provides solid testimony which checks out, are the police to blame if that witness suddenly changes their story at trial without any warning?
IMO the issue of blame is dependent upon whether Newsweek checked their sources' validity out sufficiently; not whether that source retracted that story post-publication.
-
Originally posted by Mefustae
I've just noticed that some people have actively condemned not the United States Government or Media, but those who took part in the riots...now c'mon, that is just plain wrong in every sense of the word! Just to put things in perspective; think about an object you hold very dear to you, it could be a family airlume say, or a gift from a loved one, it could be anything, anything that you personally hold so very dear to your heart that you wouldn't give it away for the World. Now, imagine someone you didn't even know just came into your house, took that object off you, and flushed it down the damn toilet, destroying it. That is just a taste of what Muslims would feel, indeed...
...now, Muslims are deeply religeous, you can be put to death for desecrating the Koran in some countries, and yet you seem to query their motives behind rioting when some Western ***hole flushes their Holy book down a Prison toilet in a vain attempt to break someone they're psycologically torturing?!? So before you start spouting coldly that their actions were 'counter-productive' or accuse Muslims of being 'Half-Witts', look in a damn mirror and ask yourself, "What would i think if the roles were reversed?"
I stand my position that it was their own fault for rioting, and that they should be punished for the deaths, not those who printed the story.
Take your example. Someone comes into my house and flushes, say, my parents ashes down the toilet (this is assuming I had my parents ashes - they're both alive. It's just an example of a non living object that would hold immense emotional value). Would I be angry? Of course. Would I yell at the person who did it? Absolutely. Would I seek revenge in the form of physical punishment (ie. beat the crap out of them)? Quite possibly. Would I kill them? Hell, I might, if I were emotionally unstable enough at the time. But would I go out and kill 14 randoms on the street? No, absolutely not. The people who died weren't the ones desecrating the Koran, and nothing, no holy book, no national flag, no parents ashes is worth killing 14 people over.
-
Hey, i'm not alleviating the blame for those who took part in the Riots which led to the deaths, i'm saying that you can't hold people responsible when they were the ones who were provoked...
...the example of your Parent's ashes is indeed a really great analogy, but even that's just not enough to replicate the feeling Muslims would experience when hearing the Koran desecrated. While ashes hold untold personal value, how can that really compare to what a given person believes absolutely. Again, Muslim are extremely devout followers of their faith, some may say Fanatical to a certain extent, so can you really question their motives to complete and total outrage at the idea of someone......
....ah to hell with this, i'm hungry and a little fed up with giving my own crooked opinion, you get the idea from my previous posts, so...yeah...think about it....
-
It's not right to riot because of this; even for the amount of offence caused, doing so can only hurt people - and not even the people they 'want' to be punished for it, but innocent bystanders.
Incidentally, Moazzam Begg ( a former Guantanamo Bay detainee, released without charge when he arrived in the Uk after several years detention) has claimed stories of the Koran being flushed down the toilet - amongst other things - are true. The story doesn't seem to be on the web just yet, though (it's on the front page of The Herald today).
-
Originally posted by Mefustae
So before you start spouting coldly that their actions were 'counter-productive' or accuse Muslims of being 'Half-Witts', look in a damn mirror and ask yourself, "What would i think if the roles were reversed?" [
"Bloody idiots..Can't belive how stupid people can get.."
*turns next page of newspaper and continues reading*
-
As far as I'm concerned, the words that count cannot be burnt or drowned, because they are written in your heart and mind.
-
Morons--morons, morons, morons! They're all morons!
Here's how journalism works:
- A news organization (AP/Reuters, etc.) report on a story
- Your local media recieves the feed off the wire from them
- Story is written, with of course, a detail or two omitted
- Story goes to editor, more details omitted for the sake of space/hidden agenda
- Story goes to print
News never gets questioned. It just gets reported. That's what's wrong! Things also rush through because of deadlines, but this is something they should've known would have consequences, and yeah, people are stupid for believing anything they read. No one is innocent. Both parties are guilty.
-
On Sunday, Afghan Muslim clerics threatened to call for a holy war against the United States.
I could understand them getting a bit pissed off about this, (as I would be if I were in their situation), but a holy war? As serious as the situation is, it's kinda hard not to laugh at these people. Alright, so the media made a mistake, (or flat out lied, as all you cynics think out there), but even if this was a true story, the Muslim community is completey and totally overreacting. Remember, it's only 1 PERSON OUT OF THE WHOLE DAMN COUNTRY who flushed it down, it's not like millions of people did it or something. A holy war against the US because a certian individual flushed a holy book down the toilet would not accomplish much IMHO.
-
Well, sorry to have to explain this, but it's exactly this kind of reaction that make Islamist want to go Jihad on your ass. I'm sure they could understand that not every American is like this, if each and every time something like this happen, the perps got with less than a slap on the hand. IMO, if Abu-Grahib and company didn't happen, this particular tidbit of information wouldn't have the same effect.
-
If the Muslims are that offended and feel the need to act, they should attack the media perps themselves, not the whole friggin country. I agree that this mistake should not go unpunished, but I don't believe that the media is responsible for the deaths of these people that the Muslims killed in their riots. If I were a Muslim cleric, I would certianly sue the ass of all who were involved in the mistake, or lie, or whatever, and make them pay for spewing such crap without confirming their story, but going totally nutzo and declaring holy war is just stupid when a peaceful solution could be implemented IMHO.
-
Why would they attack the media ? As far as I know, it isn't the media, but the military that desecrated their holy book. And before you say that Newsweek didn't confirm the story, I'd like you to search a little for what ex-prisoner have to say. You're right when you say no one can convict flushing it, but it the general idea of their book being desecrated that plunged the Islamist into frothing at the mouth. Frankly, as time pass, I see less and less difference between the average American redneck, convinced of his moral superiority, and the average Islamist, convinced of his religious superiority.
-
Bring back Ghandi.
-
Originally posted by Genryu
Why would they attack the media ? As far as I know, it isn't the media, but the military that desecrated their holy book. And before you say that Newsweek didn't confirm the story, I'd like you to search a little for what ex-prisoner have to say. You're right when you say no one can convict flushing it, but it the general idea of their book being desecrated that plunged the Islamist into frothing at the mouth. Frankly, as time pass, I see less and less difference between the average American redneck, convinced of his moral superiority, and the average Islamist, convinced of his religious superiority.
Alright then. I was just saying that they jumped to action a bit too fast. If I was going to do something as extreme as declare a holy war I would at least look into the matter personally and not just take all of my info from one source (Newsweek). :blah:
EDIT: An' I aint' no friggin fraggin redneck, ya hear? :thepimp:
-
I hear ya.... Pimp :D.
Still, I did a little research, and it seems that many people from Guantamono and Abu-Grahib did report desecration of the Koran. Sure, no source was a source like CNN, BBC or whatelse, but I have a hard time believing a western news channel would report on this, as in our eyes this is not something really important.