Written by: Beck

Newsweek published an article about abuse done to the Koran at Gitmo as part of terrorist interrogations. As they themselves report, the article sparked riots in Afghanistan and across the Muslim world, resulting in lots of death and destruction.

By the end of the week, the rioting had spread from Afghanistan throughout much of the Muslim world, from Gaza to Indonesia. Mobs shouting "Protect our Holy Book!" burned down government buildings and ransacked the offices of relief organizations in several Afghan provinces. The violence cost at least 15 lives, injured scores of people and sent a shudder through Washington, where officials worried about the stability of moderate regimes in the region.

Well, I just heard on FoxNews that Newsweek's "anonymous source" couldn't say for sure whether he'd even "seen a Koran" let alone watched one get "flushed down a toilet." Newsweek is in full apology mode, backpedaling as fast as possible.

Long story short, Newsweek, a notoriously liberal rag, was more than happy to print any allegation made by anyone, regardless of how reliable, so long as it would reflect negatively on the Bush administration and its War on Terror. Now they've set American foreign policy back an enormous amount, not to mention getting a bunch of people killed.

Great work Newsweek. It's not everyone who can say that their printed fabrications are capable of unleashing all four of the apocalypse's horsemen.

Update: Jawa Report is on the case. Rusty observes:

Another reliable "anonymous" source. To make a contention with this sort of potential impact Isikoff should have had at least 3 sources two of which would be willing to go on the record. Don't these people have the slightest concern for the consequences of their actions. Are they so myopic in their zeal that thinly verified assertions are synonymous with fact.

The pen is mightier than the sword and when used indiscriminately equally as deadly.

Further Update: Instapundit picks up on the story. Glenn Reynolds has much the same insights that Rusty & I have:

Two points: (1) If they had wrongly reported the race of a criminal and produced a lynching, they'd feel much worse -- which is why they generally don't report such things, a degree of sensitivity they don't extend to reporting on, you know, minor topics like wars; and (2) If a blogger had made a similar mistake, with similar consequences, we'd be hearing about Big Media's superior fact-checking and layers of editors.

People died, and U.S. military and diplomatic efforts were damaged, because -- let's be clear here -- Newsweek was too anxious to get out a story that would make the Bush Administration and the military look bad.

Just heard: Newsweek apologizes to those who may have been hurt. Talk about a day late and a dollar short.