It's the Newsweek thing again. Quid 3 called us this a.m. to call our attention to David Brooks' column about the now-infamous Newsweek
Koran-flush kerfuffle. She actually called to point out the prominent
mention of "an influential blog" that shall remain nameless.*
There was a tiny consolation that the mention wasn't complimentary but
we needed to calm down and read the rest of the column and realize that
we agreed with Mr. Brooks on the substance of his analysis. He
asserts that the only reason this report gained any attention was
that Muslim extremists took it and turned it into riots as a part of a
continuing campaign to portray the West as Satan's stronghold and an
enemy of Islam. This is correct. We remind everyone that
no one in this
hemisphere thought anything of the article until
there were riots in Afghanistan. The Pentagon snoozed
through the flushing, pre-publication and post-, the White House didn't
see fit to comment for 11 days after publication and the rest of
us (we speak loosely for those who actually read Newsweek, though we
are not among them) did a big "Ho hum, more torture that isn't torture.
" It wasn't even the point of the article; it was incidental.
Putting the Newsweek story in
perspective, the blogospheric claim that this is "worse than Memogate"
is ridiculous if you are looking for evidence of fraudulent
reporting. And anyway, this isn't a case of intrepid bloggers
catching Mainstream Media in a lie. It certainly doesn't approach
Eason Jordan's whoppers for blatant anti-Americanism.
Anonymous in Austin
Where we disagree with Mr. Books is using the example of the forever-nameless blog. Mr. Influential Blogger
actually has a legitimate point which is that the Mainstream Media
always presume the worst about America's military. It isn't just
the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy saying so. Hugh Hewitt interviewed Terry
Moran (the reporter who owns the whiney voice that asked Scott
McClellan "Who made you the editor of Newsweek?" ) The whole interview
was fascinating (here) but this is the salient bit:
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. That's different from the media doing it's job of challenging the exercise of power without fear or favor.
The Newsweek story was just sort of common, on all levels. The intent of the article was to highlight problems with the FBI's investigation of detainee abuse, and interdepartmental friction between the FBI and DOD. The example of "abuse" that they lead with is "in an attempt to rattle suspects, [military interogators] placed Qur'ans on toilets and, in at least one case, flushed a holy book down the toilet." Now you can see why we put the word "abuse" in quotes.
Relevant aside: As American taxpayers, we at Quid Nimis demand better value for our "abuse" dollars. Surely the Pentagon can come up with actual tortures that either produce results or at least deep unhappiness in the recipients. This Koran on the Crapper stuff is dumb, dumb, dumb.
Irrelevant aside: This time the extemists are rioting and killing themselves. Thanks, Newsweek!
*Greetings, Austin. I like your search feature.
bbmoe