Comments on: NYT Again Repeating Pentagon Propaganda

By: brewmn

brewmn — Fri, 22 May 2009 19:56:00 +0000

‘This is a complete mischaracterization of Bumiller’s perfectly balanced story.’

First, I would ask you to then justify the headline, if the intent of the report is to debunk the claim?

Second, I read the article on a flight yesterday, and my reaction was exactly the same as Mr. Gude’s. So no, the story was perfectly balanced in the classic Beltway fashion: an exhaustive recitation of the contents of the report, with a couple of caveats tacked on at the end of a long piece.

The article’s intent and effect was to add a voice to the arguments against closing Guantanamo. Maybe that’s “balanced” in your mind, but you’re simply wrong in that regard.

By: SqueakyRat

SqueakyRat — Fri, 22 May 2009 16:53:35 +0000

The other gaping hole in the story is the Pentagon’s use “terrorism or militant activity” to describe what the detainees in question are supposed to have “returned to.”

Since, for example, giving money to a Hamas-linked charity (whether you know about the link or not) is sufficient to brand you as a supporter of terrorists, for the US gov’t.’s purposes, how many get swept in under the even weaker rubric of “militant activity.” The Pentagon report smells like rotten hamburger, and Bumiller bought the whole package.

By: Inigo

Inigo — Fri, 22 May 2009 15:29:36 +0000

Judith Miller all over again.

By: Asp

Asp — Fri, 22 May 2009 14:53:28 +0000

This is a complete mischaracterization of Bumiller’s perfectly balanced story. The complaint that the caveats start in paragraph 17 is a red herring. A key caveat is in the second paragraph; the 15 intervening paragraphs review the context in which the report is surfacing, and the subsequent assessment is almost entirely about reasons to to be sceptical of its conclusions, with the admirable Mark Denbeaux’s voice dominating. Far more space is devoted to showing holes in the report than to reporting its conclusions. Not a word in the story suggests that the report’s conclusions should be taken at face value.

By: Vitali

Vitali — Fri, 22 May 2009 14:15:17 +0000

funny, neither u nor anyone else had a problem when the NYT illegally leaked information from the Bush administration on tactics that prevented terrorist attacks & led to the capture of Islamic terrorists…and now that Bush is gone, you and others want to claim Bush-holdovers are letting out info while NEVER questioning anything that Obama and his tax-dodging, incapables do or say? Ain’t this some shit…maybe it was Bush holdover William Gates….oooooooops – when you hold over a Bush member it might be good to actually know his name – FAIL – this admin is a joke…banana republic style

oh by the way – almost all Democrats voted AGAINST funding the closure of Gitmo & almost all Dems don’t want Gitmo terrorists in the US

By: Chris Diaz

Chris Diaz — Fri, 22 May 2009 09:38:02 +0000

Talk about twisting something to meet your ideological agenda. A precise headline would have been “Pentagon Report on Detainees Questionable”