In its May 9 issue, out on May 2, Newsweek cited "sources" saying the incident involving the Muslim holy book would be in an upcoming military report on alleged interrogation abuses at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention center. This wasn't the first account of alleged Koran desecration--several former detainees have publicly made that claim--but Newsweek was the first to give the charge an official imprimatur. Not until 11 days later, after protests that started in Afghanistan turned violent and spread, did Pentagon spokesman Lawrence DiRita tell the magazine its report was wrong. No such credible allegations were found, he said, and none will appear in the U.S. Southern Command's report.

When Newsweek then went back to its original source, he reportedly reasserted that he had seen investigative accounts of Koran defiling but could no longer be certain that information had been part of the material for the Southcom report. Veteran investigative reporter Michael Isikoff, who wrote the piece with a colleague, said in an interview that his source is well placed and has been reliable. Further, he said that a senior Pentagon official shown the story in advance did not object to the Koran reference. "We didn't foresee the enormously sensitive nature of this particular claim being made about the Koran," Isikoff said. "It didn't leap out to us at Newsweek. It didn't leap out to them at the Pentagon."

Aftershocks. Despite Whitaker's apology, and a subsequent full retraction, the story last week continued to roil the Muslim world and dominate news reports. Even as late-night comedians jumped in, the [conservative -MITH] New York Post, in a separate example of cultural insensitivity, ran the headline: "Holy Shiite-- Newsweek Retracts Its Deadly Toilet Tale." Everyone, it seems, was finding opportunity in what Whitaker called Newsweek 's "public relations agony." Islamic extremists continued spreading the report to stoke anti-American sentiment. Media bashers and hand-wringers weighed in. And the administration deflected attention from other questions about interrogation abuses, stirred by another conviction last week in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.

Former detainees and a lawyer for current prisoners previously have stated that U.S. personnel at Guantanamo had placed the Koran in a toilet, but the Pentagon has said it also does not view those allegations as credible

Ahmad Naji Abid Ali Dulaymi, who was held at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq for 10 months, singled out a soldier or noncommissioned officer known to detainees only as "Fox." He said prisoners were forced to sit naked, were licked by dogs, and were soaked in cold water and then forced to sit in front of a powerful air-conditioner.

"But frankly," he said, "the worst insult and humiliation they were doing to us, especially for the religious ones among us, is when they, especially Fox, tore up holy books of Koran and threw them away into the trash or into dirty water.

"Almost every day, Fox used to take a brand new Koran, and tear off the plastic cover in front of us and then throw it away into the trash container."

=====================

Five former prisoners have told The Times of Koran desecration. Jamal Harith, a British Muslim, said interrogators at Guantanamo often kicked or knocked his Koran around. He said guards once deliberately targeted his holy book while hosing down his cell.

"Everybody was upset, but when you are in Cuba you learn to accept," Harith said after his return to Britain. "You accept it as the norm when you are in there."

Other accounts from former detainees have been posted on the Internet. Tarek Dergoul, another British Muslim who was held at Guantanamo Bay, recalled soldiers insulting Islam.

"They used to read the English translation of the Koran with their feet up, mocking, for example saying, 'There are more questions in it than answers,' " he said.

Other times, Dergoul said, they "ripped up" Korans. When some soldiers were rotating out of Cuba they would write obscenities in the Korans.

And some allegations are contained in lawsuits, such as one filed against Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld by seven men held in Iraq and Afghanistan.

One of the plaintiffs is Arkan M. Ali, who was held by U.S. authorities in Iraq for nearly a year, part of that time at Abu Ghraib.

Ali listed 11 incidents of torture and abuse. He said he was twice beaten unconscious during interrogations. He said his arm was stabbed and sliced, his forearm shocked and burned. He said he was locked for several days in a wooden coffin-like box, sometimes naked except for a hood over his head.

But it is his 11th and final allegation that in today's clamor over the Koran that stands out. Ali said U.S. soldiers repeatedly desecrated the Koran in front of him and other prisoners, "including having a military dog pick up the Koran in its mouth."

FROM THE FILES: Maybe these newly declassified affidavits and depositions taken during the official investigation into Abu Ghraib can illuminate the Koran abuse mystery a little more. The following deposition is interesting because it is by a U.S. interrogator, not an inmate, and refers to a technique within the military-approved term "Pride and Ego Down" that was apparently already in use. Here's the first deposition, dated 5/21/04. It is from someone who was

"part of a five person Mobile Training Team from Fort Huachuca, AZ. The mission of my team was to provide an overall assessment of interrogation operations, training and advice and assistance. My focus was interrogation operations ... The Intelligence Rules of Engagement (IROE) was posted and was very similar to that IROE used in Afghanistan. During my observation of interrogation operations, the 519th demonstrated experience and dedication to the mission. Most techniques required a very specific written plan with a schedule and parameters. The MP's appeared to be in control and professional I did see detainees in various states of undress to include nakedness and detainees wearing towels. The MP's used segregation and stripping as a way to keep the detainees under control and to keep them from talking. On one occasion, I had a conversation with XXXXX, concerning the IROE and interrogation approaches. I gave him examples of approaches including Pride and Ego Down where an interrogator took a Koran, threw it on the floor and stepped on it and Fear Up Harsh where the interrogator had a dog trained to bark on cue if the interrogator thought the detainee was lying. I also explained sleep deprivation. I told him that in Afghanistan the interrogators could use an adjusted sleep schedule for detainees. The conversation was meant to explain why these activities were prohibited or restricted.

This is a little confusing. The person seems to be conflating approved and unapproved techniques - monitored sleep deprivation (approved) and Koran abuse (barred) respectively - and then saying that she was detailing them to show why they "were prohibited or restricted." Both? Why? A subsequent deposition, which appears to be by the same person (but might not be) was taken on 06/30/04. Here's the money quote:

I told him of a story I heard in Afghanistan of a dog used during an interrogation. The dog was trained to bark on cue and would bark any time the interrogator had reason to believe the detainee was lying during the interrogation. I told him this would probably not be allowed but that the presence of barking dogs in the prison might be effective. I told him of a story of an interrogator using and Pride and Ego Down approach. The interrogator took a copy of the Koran and threw it on the ground and stepped on the Koran, which resulted in a detainee riot. .. I never personally witnessed the above incidents, but heard about them from other interrogation facility personnel...

I don't know what to make of this. The witness seems to be saying that s/he was referring to methods that were not authorized, and then s/he says they had already been used in Afghanistan. We may here be seeing part of the confusion in policy that helped make Bagram, Abu Ghraib and the torture in Basra, Tikrit and elsewhere possible, confusion for which no one has been held accountable.
- 11:57:00 AM