In a page-one story for the Washington Post, Howard Kurtz reports on the big mess Newsweek created with its little May 9 Periscope item reported by Michael Isikoff: "Newsweek apologizes." I think that a fairer take on Evan Thomas's article on the fiasco would be "Newsweek strikes again," or (consistent with the Newsweek convention) "NEWSWEEK strikes again."

In attempting to cushion its confession of error with an updated "fake but accurate" maneuver, Thomas wound up his article yesterday:

Bader Zaman Bader, a 35-year-old former editor of a fundamentalist English-language magazine in Peshawar, was released from more than two years' lockup in Guantánamo seven months ago. Arrested by Pakistani security as a suspected Qaeda militant in November 2001, he was handed over to the U.S. military and held at a tent at the Kandahar airfield. One day, Bader claims, as the inmates' latrines were being emptied, a U.S. soldier threw in a Qur'an. After the inmates screamed and protested, a U.S. commander apologized. Bader says he still has nightmares about the incident.

Such stories may spark more trouble...

Rather than mitigating the damage with a straightforward apology -- one that is warranted by the circumstances -- Thomas compounds NEWSWEEK's original offense by retailing a story peddled by an Islamist with a grudge. Here let's go to the man of the moment as quoted in Kurtz's story this morning:

"Obviously we all feel horrible about what flowed from this, but it's important to remember there was absolutely no lapse in journalistic standards here," [Isikoff] said. "We relied on sources we had every reason to trust and gave the Pentagon ample opportunity to comment...We're going to continue to investigate what remains a very murky situation."

Well, thanks. We appreciate your vow to continue working the story, Mr. Isikoff, and we know that if it turns out you were wrong, you'll want to break that story too.

How did NEWSWEEK confirm its anonymous source's tale that a forthcoming Southern Command report would "includ[e] mention of flushing the Qu'ran down a toilet"? Thomas writes:

A SouthCom spokesman contacted by Isikoff declined to comment on an ongoing investigation, but NEWSWEEK National Security Correspondent John Barry, realizing the sensitivity of the story, provided a draft of the NEWSWEEK PERISCOPE item to a senior Defense official, asking, "Is this accurate or not?" The official challenged one aspect of the story: the suggestion that Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller, sent to Gitmo by the Pentagon in 2001 to oversee prisoner interrogation, might be held accountable for the abuses. Not true, said the official (the PERISCOPE draft was corrected to reflect that). But he was silent about the rest of the item. The official had not meant to mislead, but lacked detailed knowledge of the SouthCom report.

If this satisfies journalistic standards at NEWSWEEK, maybe it's the standards that need some work.

And how about those nightmares of Bader Bader? In "Flush your Newsweek down the toilet," the Indigent Pundit reports:

Mr. Bader Zaman Bader (assuming it's the same fellow) was released from Guantanamo Bay seven months ago. He was so distraught over the nightmare of watching the desecration of the Qur'an that, upon his release, he failed to mention the incident when questioned by journalists from the Associated Press and China's Xinhua.

Another former prisoner, Bader Zaman Bader, said he was interrogated "150 times" by his American jailers but never abused. - via Military.com 23 SEP 2004

One of the prisoners released from U.S. detention, Bader Zaman Bader, has demanded that the United States compensate him for three years of his life spent in custody, China's Xinhua news agency reported on 22 September. Bader said that he has a "right" to demand compensation since he "was innocent and the U.S. military failed to prove any charges" against him. According to the report, Bader is the first Afghan prisoner released from U.S. custody who has demanded compensation from the United States. - via Radio Free Afghanistan 23 SEP 2004

In an email message last night, the Indigent Pundit noted that Thomas appears not to have performed a Google search on Bader Bader before repeating his tale yesterday. I would add that none of the four (count 'em) NEWSWEEK reporters with whom Thomas collaborated on his story yesterday appear to have done such a search either.

If they had, NEWSWEEK's "journalistic standards" would preclude simply passing on Bader Bader's nightmares of Korans down the toilet, wouldn't they?

UPDATE: See also Roger Kimball's "News weak and the restless natives" and Discover the Network/Moonbat Central's "Toiletgate."