da, Da. DA ! - DaviD,

RHF wrote:

DX Ace,
.
NewsWeek 'lit' the Match in the Power Room - Bang !
.
YES - The Radical (Islam-O-Fascist) Muslim Leaders
used the NewsWeek Phony Story to Incite their
Street Mob of Followers to Riot against the West
(The Infidels).
.
YES - The News Week "Lie" was put to use as an Excuse
in the {Arab} Street for Political Anti-Government Action.
.
BUT - NewsWeek Should have Known that the very
Nature of their Report (True or False) would have this
impact in the Islamic World.
.
NewsWeek Did NOT Check It Facts (LIES) and People Died [.]
.
NewsWeek Does Bare the Responsibility for it's Actions
and the Results of those Actions. Especially when
NewsWeek Prints LIES in the name of truth.

So in other words if some Boston rag published a glowing story about John Fraud
Kerry and some folks in Keokuk, Iowa went on a rampage because the Boston rag
published lies and 30 people were killed the Boston rag would be responsible?

I don't think so.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

DX Ace - Because DaviD Knows . . .

DaviD,

MnMikew wrote:
"David" wrote in message
...

They Lied to Us
Memo proves leadership knew Saddam was not a threat

by Molly Ivins


"Molly Ivins is the former editor of the liberal monthly The Texas
Observer"

A liberal with an axe to grind. Yawn.



And one would be hard pressed to find anyone in Texas who can stand her
rantings.

LC wrote:


There is no excusing Newsweek's irresponsibility in this. But this is not
really a story about media bias or carelessness at all. There is a much
larger story that is getting hardly any attention at all. The gorilla in the
living room that no one wants to notice, is that flushing a Qur'an down the
toilet should not be grounds to commit murder.

You don't need much ground for the radical islamic mind to go beserk and
commit murder. When dealing with the radical muslim mind, it isn't a
rational mind you are dealing with.


Neither one says anything whatsoever about a culture that condones -
celebrates -wanton murder of innocent people, mayhem, and destruction in
response to the alleged and unproven destruction of a book.

The question here is one of proportionate response. If a Qur'an had indeed
been flushed, Muslims would have justifiably been offended. They may
justifiably have considered the perpetrators boors, or barbarians, or
hell-bound unbelievers. They may justifiably have issued denunciations
accordingly. But that is all. To kill people thousands of miles away who had
nothing to do with the act, and to fulminate with threats and murder against
the entire Western world, all because of this alleged act, is not just
disproportionate. It is not just excessive. It is mad. And every decent
person in the world ought to have the courage to stand up and say that it is
mad.

But that is the mindset of radical islam.

"David" wrote

That's laughable. Reports of trashing the Koran have been around for
years. Christian fundamentalists have trashed them on TV.

George Bush has killed hundreds of thousands of people. Newsweek
magazine, a couple dozen. Get surreal.


And Leftist NeoCOMS have killed a hundred million.
______________________________________________

The Real Lesson of Newsweekgate

When in April EBay offered a consecrated host for sale, imagine if Catholics
had rioted and seventeen people were killed.

The media would have been full of stories about the dark side of the
"Christian Right."

Imagine if, when Muslims desecrated the Tomb of Joseph in Nablus in 2000,
destroying it with hammers, rampaging Jewish mobs had killed dozens of
Palestinians.

The establishment media response would again have inundated us with stories
about the heroic Palestinians and their Israeli oppressors.

Neither of those things really happened. But seventeen people have been
killed and hundreds wounded in riots by Muslims since Newsweek published its
story about an American interrogator flushing a Qur'an down the toilet at
the detention center at Guantanamo Bay.

And yet the media establishment seems preoccupied only with the fact that
Newsweek, in publishing a false story that it has since retracted, has done
a very bad thing. And that the Bush Administration must do something to calm
tempers and soothe feelings in the Islamic world.

There is no excusing Newsweek's irresponsibility in this. But this is not
really a story about media bias or carelessness at all. There is a much
larger story that is getting hardly any attention at all. The gorilla in the
living room that no one wants to notice, is that flushing a Qur'an down the
toilet should not be grounds to commit murder.

This aspect of the story is being ignored by spokesmen on both the Left and
the Right. After the initial reports of rioting, Juan Cole sputtered,
"Whatever goddam military genius came up with the bright idea of flushing
the Koran down the toilet at Guantanamo should be court-martialed, and Bush
had better get out there apologizing before this thing spirals further out
of control." On the other side of the political spectrum, Paul Marshall
wrung his hands in National Review: "Even if Newsweek publishes a full
retraction, the damage is done. Much of the Muslim world will regard it
merely as a cover-up and feel reconfirmed in the view that America is at war
with Islam."

Neither Cole nor Marshall, however, made any moral judgment about the
rioters. Marshall was furious with Newsweek: "It would be charitable to
think that if Newsweek had known how explosive the story was it may have
held off until it had more confirmation. If this is true, it is an
indication that the media's widespread failure to pay careful attention to
the complexities of religion not only misleads us about domestic and
international affairs but also gets people killed." Cole, for his part,
directed his anger at the Bush Administration: "As a professional historian,
I would say we still do not have enough to be sure that the Koran
desecration incident took place. We have enough to consider it plausible.
Anyway, the important thing politically is that some Muslims have found it
plausible, and their outrage cannot be effectively dealt with by simple
denial. That is why I say that Bush should just come out and say we can't be
sure that it happened, but if it did it was an excess, and he apologizes if
it did happen, and will make sure it doesn't happen again (if it did)."

Neither one says anything whatsoever about a culture that condones -
celebrates -wanton murder of innocent people, mayhem, and destruction in
response to the alleged and unproven destruction of a book.

The question here is one of proportionate response. If a Qur'an had indeed
been flushed, Muslims would have justifiably been offended. They may
justifiably have considered the perpetrators boors, or barbarians, or
hell-bound unbelievers. They may justifiably have issued denunciations
accordingly. But that is all. To kill people thousands of miles away who had
nothing to do with the act, and to fulminate with threats and murder against
the entire Western world, all because of this alleged act, is not just
disproportionate. It is not just excessive. It is mad. And every decent
person in the world ought to have the courage to stand up and say that it is
mad.

I suspect that even Juan Cole and Paul Marshall, somewhere in the back of
their minds, know that it is mad too. But why don't they say so? Because
Rule #1 in the establishment (Left and Right) view of this present conflict
is that it has nothing to do with Islam. To bring a moral judgment to bear
upon Muslim people, or to explore the ways in which Islam fuels the
conflict, is therefore absolutely forbidden.

This kind of analysis, dominant as it is in the media, does the Western
world an enormous disservice. The reaction to the Newsweek story in the
Muslim world only shows how critical it is that the elements of Islam that
give rise to fanaticism and violence be examined and confronted. Lives are
at stake. But Cole and Marshall, and many others like them on both the Left
and the Right, can't see this necessity through the enveloping fog of
political correctness.

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch; author of Onward Muslim
Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens America and the West (Regnery), and
Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World's Fastest Growing Faith
(Encounter); and editor of the essay collection The Myth of Islamic
Tolerance: Islamic Law and Non-Muslims (Prometheus). He is working on a new
book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)
(forthcoming from Regnery).

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...e.asp?ID=18108

RHF wrote:

NewsWeek Does Bare the Responsibility for it's Actions
and the Results of those Actions.


How would making one's responsibility naked help? Perhaps you meant "Bear the
responsibility"?



mike

Cmd Buzz Corey wrote:

You don't need much ground for the radical islamic mind to go beserk and
commit murder. When dealing with the radical muslim mind, it isn't a
rational mind you are dealing with.

You don't need much ground for the radical Christian mind to go berserk and
commit murder. When dealing with the radical Christian mind, it isn't a rational
mind you are dealing with.

You don't need much ground for the radical zionist mind to go berserk and commit
murder. When dealing with the radical zionist mind, it isn't a rational mind you
are dealing with.

m II wrote:

Cmd Buzz Corey wrote:

You don't need much ground for the radical islamic mind to go beserk and
commit murder. When dealing with the radical muslim mind, it isn't a
rational mind you are dealing with.

You don't need much ground for the radical Christian mind to go berserk and
commit murder. When dealing with the radical Christian mind, it isn't a rational
mind you are dealing with.

You don't need much ground for the radical zionist mind to go berserk and commit
murder. When dealing with the radical zionist mind, it isn't a rational mind you
are dealing with.

And of course, as everyone knows, there is no such thing as a Canucky mind.

dxAce
Michigan
USA