<< FUTURE WONDERS OF THE WORLD ~ MAIN ~ AUSTRALIA NEEDS RUBBER >>

BOXMAN ALI DEBOXED

The New York Times issues a correction:

In the summer of 2004, a group of former detainees of Abu Ghraib prison filed a lawsuit claiming that they had been the victims of the abuse captured in photographs that incited outrage around the world.

One, Ali Shalal Qaissi, soon emerged as their chief representative, appearing in publications and on television in several countries to detail his suffering. His prominence made sense, because he claimed to be the man in the photograph that had become the international icon of the Abu Ghraib scandal: standing on a cardboard box, hooded, with wires attached to his outstretched arms. He had even emblazoned the silhouette of that image on business cards.

The trouble was, the man in the photograph was not Mr. Qaissi ...

The New York Times profiled him last Saturday in a front-page article; in it, Mr. Qaissi insisted he had never sought the fame of his iconic status. Mr. Qaissi had been interviewed on a number of earlier occasions, including by PBS’s “Now,” Vanity Fair, Der Spiegel and in the Italian news media as the man on the box ...

He now acknowledges he is not the man in the specific photograph he printed and held up in a portrait that accompanied the Times article. But he and his lawyers maintain that he was photographed in a similar position and shocked with wires and that he is the one on his business card. The Army says it believes only one prisoner was treated in that way.

(Via J.F. Beck, currently overflowing with goodness)

Posted by Tim B. on 03/18/2006 at 12:49 PM
  1. “He had even emblazoned the silhouette of that image on business cards.”

    And his business would be what, exactly? Professional Ex-Jailbird? Litigation for Fun and Profit? Manager of seminars on “How to dine out at the New York Times’ expense for months on end”? Dick.

    Posted by paco on 2006 03 18 at 01:19 PM • permalink

  2. Professional talk-show guest?

    Posted by nofixedabode on 2006 03 18 at 01:34 PM • permalink

  3. None of those mags will EVER admit they were hoodwinked by the man not in the hood.

    Posted by ushie on 2006 03 18 at 01:48 PM • permalink

  4. You mean the NYSlime got it wrong?! Aww, c’mon!

    Posted by stats on 2006 03 18 at 02:06 PM • permalink

  5. But he and his lawyers maintain that he was photographed in a similar position and shocked with wires and that he is the one on his business card. The Army says it believes only one prisoner was treated in that way.

    Fake, but accurate?

    Posted by HisHineness on 2006 03 18 at 02:44 PM • permalink

  6. I thought I read that the wires attached to that man in the picture weren’t actually attached to anything electrical, and the whole thing was staged to scare him.  Am I wrong?

    In any case, is anybody but the delicate crowd at the NYT surprised that these bozos are claiming victimhood?

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 03 18 at 03:53 PM • permalink

  7. Victimhood - doesn’t al qaeda hold a degree course in that?

    Posted by spyder on 2006 03 18 at 05:07 PM • permalink

  8. A victim hood is what he wasn’t wearing in that picture that was not of him, right?

    Posted by PW on 2006 03 18 at 06:55 PM • permalink

  9. Mamdouh Habib is on the phone to the New York Times in 5…4…3…2….

    Posted by Dan Lewis on 2006 03 18 at 07:22 PM • permalink

  10. Speaking of Abu Graib, I wonder how long it will take our MSM to implicate Donald Rumsfeld for the recent spate of sexual assaults in using sausages in Victorian prisons.

    Posted by murph on 2006 03 18 at 08:08 PM • permalink

  11. #6—correct. It was never alleged that the wires were live. According to the Army report on its second investigation of abuses at Abu Ghraib (p.111 and 134), they were “simulated electrical wires”. the hooded man was “told” he would be electrocuted if he fell off the box. He then stood on the box for ONE WHOLE HOUR! Maybe a little perspective would help.

    Posted by arrowhead ripper on 2006 03 18 at 08:11 PM • permalink

  12. Perspective?  It’s not about perspective.

    You know what? The whole thing is wrong and the US military have done the right thing in prosecuting those involved.  That said, our friends on the Left do not really give a aeronautical root about the “victims”.  It’s all about bashing Bush and Howard.

    Posted by murph on 2006 03 18 at 09:37 PM • permalink

  13. Hmmm.

    1.

    He then stood on the box for ONE WHOLE HOUR!

    Compared to the stuff they did to me at Parris Island for the USMC, that’s pathetic.

    2. Ok everybody now all together…

    “I was the one in the photograph…”

    Posted by memomachine on 2006 03 19 at 01:32 AM • permalink

  14. Agreed, Murph.

    Those slack jawed yokels masquerading as US soldiers at Abu Ghraib did more harm to their country than any other single incident in the war to date.

    The US authorities acted quickly and decisively to lock up these cretins in Leavenworth prison, but not before the fifth column MSM got their fangs into the Bush administration.

    Compounding it all, you get known red raggers like George Negus rehashing it over and over and over and…...

    Posted by Pedro the Ignorant on 2006 03 19 at 01:39 AM • permalink

  15. And from Power Line, the NYT caught in either a lie or major incompetence to denigrate a rival to Hillary in 2008:
    http://powerlineblog.com/archives/013455.php

    Posted by andycanuck on 2006 03 19 at 03:43 AM • permalink

  16. Parris Island? USMC?

    “I am Gunnery Sergeant Hartman, your Senior Drill Instructor…”

    Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 03 19 at 06:27 AM • permalink

  17. Why has everything gone tilty? Except what I damned well wanted tilty?

    Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 03 19 at 06:29 AM • permalink

  18. untilt?

    Posted by Some0Seppo on 2006 03 19 at 12:02 PM • permalink

  19. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.