Boycott Newsweek

Mark Whitaker, editor of Newsweek, writes "We regret that we got any part of our story wrong, and extend our sympathies to victims of the violence and to the U.S. soldiers caught in its midst."

Uh, Mark? You think you're a bit frickin late there?!

In your drive to sell another magazine your print incorrect information about the Koran flushing incident based on a "knowledgeable government source" who later stated he could not be certain he had seen an account of the incident in the military report he supposedly quoted?

Did you ass wipes not learn a thing from Rathergate? Is it so important for you to trash the military or attempt to embarass the administration that you rush to press with un-verified, or un-verifiable information? Does journalistic integrity mean nothing to you, as well?

The violence that your bogus news report caused has cost - so far - 16 people their lives and more than 100 others have been injured. And you? You're sympathetic? How sweet. I'm sure that will assuage the victims created by your journalistic endeavors.

Where do you and your magazine get off, Mark? How's about you go and spend time with each of the families who have lost a loved one because you don't care enough to verify a story? When you're done with that, you can go visit every single one of the people your piss poor reporting has got injured. And when you're done with that... if you don't have the integrity to launch yourself off a cliff - how's about if you report to the nearest Mosque and try doing what you claimed our interrogators did. Then, maybe then... you'll get your due.

Lawrence DiRita of the Pentagon got it right about the supposed credible source when he said, "People are dead because of what this son of a bitch said. How could he be credible now?" Michael Isikoff and John Barry, the authors of the original story, ought to be proud of themselves - and hanging from the same rope Newsweek's "leadership" hangs itself from... right after they give-up their supposed "credible source."

Newsweek, however, plans no disciplinary action against their staff. They claim to have attempted to be transparent about exactly what happened... and they leave it to their readers to judge them.

Transparency? Give up the name of your source, you pieces of shit, or you're going the way of Dan Rather. How's that for transparent?

I hope your readers... your former readers anyway... launch a boycott on Newsweek. I'm certainly not spending another dime on that rag.

I'm going to stick to the 50% Fact-checking Department at The Enquirer where the Bat-Boy story is more credible than Newsweek's tripe. At least the Enquirer isn't getting anyone killed in mass riots based on their stories.

Boycott Newsweek